ovis 
Mog KV pve 


Be ae 
SLE 


ae 
y 


i 
eat 
a 


THE UNIVERSITY 


OF ILLINOIS 


LIBRARY | 
Wengen ih | 


y ‘ 
A Wun 


rata 4 
ta 


i TY 
of ite AA e/a to 
Kensie 


= 


—) 
= 
os 


St 


UNIVER 


— Blouse of Mepressutatives. . 
Washington, D.g 


Speaker's Daou : 


} e 


A 4 selected trom Both Sides 


= 


Ko» 
f 


COMPILED BY 


WILLIAM G. TERRELL 


MARIA UAL 


CONTENTS. 


ia | PaaE 
oger Q. Mills, of Texas (Democratic side).........esseeceseceeeee 8 


we fale 6. 


ie ae atte aie sa ota eng 


' HON. ROGER Q. MILLS, 
ae OF TEXAS. 


(Democratic Side.) 


- Both of the great political parties now represented in the Government have _ 
y repeated and authoritative declarations condemned the condition of our 
_ laws which permit the collection from the people of unnecessary revenues, and 
_ have in the most solemn manner promised its correction: and neither as citizens 
nor partisans are our countrymen in a mood to condone the deliberate violation 
of these pledges. GROVER CLEVELAND. 


No matter who may desert or who may: falter, the great fight for reform 
will goon. This country does not belong to either the monopolists or the com. 
nists, and the people will save it from both. JOHN G. CARLISLE. 


Of all the false pretenses with whe protection mocks its victims, the 


Wiiu1amM R. Morgison. 


Ge 


eter, MULLS Sai eee 

Mr. Chairman: JDuring- our late civil war the expenditures _ iF ao 
juiréd-by-arrerormous military establishment made it necessary 
i that t the burdens of taxation should be laid eee in all directions ; 


ears from 1862 to 1866, melee This was recognized at the time 
an exceptionally heavy burden. It was stated by the distin- - 
hod gentleman who then Be ae: to the House the bill so ae 


& 
D as te 
Eg 
ot 
ele 
(a 
34 
feb) 
MR 
Qs 
(qe) 
B 
ia) 
jo} 
[or 
(a) 
Oi 
o 
Se 
(=a 58 
= 
- ©: 
oO 
4 
pede 
(0 je} 
oO 
5 
e) 
=F 
fae) 
jm 
° 
Ph 
4 
pee) 
De) 
“9 
=) 
Q 
5 
.& 
mM 
ct 


ch give it our eocore 7 
More than twenty years have elapsed : since he war ended, ie 
. 8 ce 


i 


* Pe 


oy ROG WAETS 


generation has passed away and a new generation has appearer: on 
the stage since peace has returned to bless our common country; 
but these war taxes still remain; and they are heavier to-day chan! | 
they were on an average during the five years of the existence of 
hostilities. The average rate of duty during the last five years, 
from 1883 to 1887, inclusive, on dutiable goods amounts to 44.51 per ~ 
per cent., and during the last year the average is 47.10 per cent. 

Instead of the rate of taxation being reduced to meet the wants of | 

an efficient administration of government in time of peace, it con-— 
tinues to grow and fill the coffers of the Government with money 
not required for public purposes, and which rightfully ho 

remain in the pockets of the people. 

After Congress had so largely increased the duties on impel 
and thus bestowed most liberal and generous bounties on our 
manufacturers, a light internal tax was imposed on the products” of 
domestic manufacture to help the Government meet the heavy 
demands of war. The internal tax imposed on home manufactures . 
_.. was but atithe of the heavy burden imposed on the people by the 
increased duties on foreign goods. It brought to the Treasury in 
1866 $127,000,000—a sum which was less than 5 per cent. upon the 
value of the manufactured product of that year. It was thought 
not to be unreasonable to require this small contribution from those” 
whose bounty Congress had increased from 18 to 40 per cent. in the. 
‘price of their products. sue ; 

But, Mr. Chairman, that tax is gone. It could not be rote 
a It was a tax on wealth. It came out of the pockets of the manu 


turer. As soon as the war was ended complaint was made that this 
_ -~-—« tax ~was a war tax, that it was no longer necessary, and it we “S 
ee repealed. Congress imposed a tax on incomes, too, to help the 


Government to meet the expenditures of war. It brought to t 
Treasury, in 1866, $72,000,000. The official reports showed tha 
four hundred and sixty thousand one hundred and seventy pers 
ae out of the whole population had incomes above the exemption, at 
_-~—~—-—s they had $707,000,000 of net annual income, while the balance of t] 
people had nothing beyond what was required for annual supp 
- Yet scarcely had the war ended until this tax was declared to be 
exceedingly odious, inquisitorial, and oppressive; and Cn was 
asked to repeal it, and it is gone. z 


had an annual income of $707,000,000 to pay anything to support 
Government, and they hurriedly swept that ‘‘ odious” measure f 
the statute-book. Besides these there were taxes on the ae 


Re 5 apy yee — Fn pete Pee: 
eg 2 = ee 


t - i. ee 2. ww 2s a i ad MPI, aq): te 54,0" 
afl eee, ee rt ss pele? ae eae t heb ra Eh x f mae ty et 
age ee See ON Cte eae dt ate a ee ee a" 

Pare eager e 4 K ~ a 2 
Sore) ‘ 4 f ss oa a ey, * Fs ~ at fr be’ «< 
: : - 


ROGER Q. MILLS. 5 


5; companies, taxes on bank capital, bank. deposits, and ban ; checks, 
1 but they are gone. Congress lent a willing ear to the demands of 
Ki “wealthy corpor ations and individuals and took all the burden from 
them, but the war taxes on clothing, like the poor, we have always 
with us. These taxes were given up at a time when our interest- 
bearing debt of more than $2,000,000,000 was staring us in the face 
and demanding from the Government more than $140,000,000 
annually to meet its interest. 
_ With these facts before their eyes they made haste to roll all 
“the burdens of taxation off the shoulders of the wealthy and lay 
them upon the shoulders of those who could only pay as they 
x procured the means by their daily toil. Could not that $127,000,000 - 
contributed by the manufacturers from the rich bounties which 
the Government had given have been retained until the war debt 
vas paid? Could not the $72,000,000 from incomes have been held 
for afew years longer? Could not the tax on the receipts of the_ 
wealthy corporations have been continued for one decade? 
If these taxes had been kept ten years longer we would to-day 
have no national debt, and in addition to the moderate reductions 
B oo” proposed we could give back to the people the hundred mil- 
ions now required to pay its interest and sinking fund. Upon 
WwW Giiat economic principle or principle of Justice were these taxes 
‘re epealed and the whole burden laid on articles going into daily con- 
‘su maoption, and which must be obtained by the labor of mind and 
ey muscle? - 
- Was the tax ‘of 3 per cent. on the domestic blanket paid by the 
w manufacturer more oppressive then than the tax of 79 per cent. on 
oth foreign and domestic blankets paid by the people? 
Was the tax of 3 per cent. on a wool hat paid by the manu- 
urer more oppressive than the tax of 73 per cent. on both paid 


by the consumer? Was the tax of 3 per cent. on women’s and 


. against our prosperity, our labor, and our boners is 
pee vigorously prosecuted—a war that is exhausting in its 
Mt: 


Rate 


oe \e 
OP ee ete wn, 
Re Seer 


~ 


Xs. +. oe ¥ 
Ss git a eee S. Page ee eae 
Sa nh es res Git adi oe. ents © 


~ 


Seat 


eae 
: 


a 

' 
i 
bere 


8 : ROGER Q. MILLS. 


destructive invasions on labor, whether it is employed in agricul- 
ture, manufactures, commerce, or mining. Every effort that has 
been made to bring this war on the industries of the country to an 
end and to restore the Government to the peace establishment has 
been resisted at every step, and so far every effort to end this 
unjustifiable invasion of the rights of the people has been de“eated. 
The gentlemen who represent the minority of the Committee 
on Ways and Means boast that they have reduced taxation $360,- 
000,000. They point with pride to the splendid column which they 


have erected, but that column has no stone in it to tell of their 
devotion to the masses who live by daily toil. It is built of blocks 


of marble, every one of which speaks of favoritism to the wealthy, 
of special privileges to rich and powerful classes» In 1883 they — 
finished this magnificent shaft, which they have been for years” 
erecting, and crowned it with the last stone by repealing the 
internal tax on playing-cards and putting a 20 per cent. tax on se 
Bible. 5 
We on this side of the House have been trying to rene tac 
tion on the necessaries of life to the people, and so far without 
success. The minority of the committee charge that we have 
accomplished nothing to compare with what they have done. That 
indeed, would be a grave charge if the gentlemen who make it could 


- show that their united opposition had not been thrown across our 


path at every step. But it does not lie in their mouths to charge 
this side of the House with failing to reduce taxation. Whenever 
we have brought. bills into the House to reduce taxes on the neces- 
saries of life they have mustered nearly their entire strength to 
defeat us. sats . 
The members Fort that side who have come to our help could - 
be counted on the fingers of one hand. Twice they have stricken | if 
out the enacting clauses of our bills to reduce taxation, and twice 
they have refused even to consider the question of reducing taxation — 
on the people. gee 
_ Now, sir, what has been the result of this policy? Enormous - 
taxation upon the necessaries of life has been a constant drain upon 
the people—taxation not only to support all the expenditures of 
Government, but taxation so contrived as to fill the pockets’ of a. 
privileged class, and taking from the people $5 for private Purposea} 
for every dollar that it carries to the public Treasury. * ee 
~ This is one of the vicious results of the war tariff. The taxes, — 
both for public and private purposes, are paid by labor. Lod re 


assessed on labor. Now, let us see how it benefits labor, as I e 


nA : - ROGER Q. MILLS. 7 


be his work finds a suit of woolen clothes that he can buy for $10 ~ 
“a 
x 


without the tariff tax, then the suit of clothes can be procured for 
4 ten days’ work; but the manufacturer comes to Congress and says, 
_ “T must be pr -otected against the man buying this cheap suit of 
clothes,” and Congress protects him by putting a duty of 100 per 
cent., or $10 more. Now it will require the laborer to work twenty 


_ have not been annihilated? Has he not been required to work twice 
-as long under the tariff as he would have done without to obtain 
Dis suit of clothes? 

But how has that duty affected the manufacturer? If it required 
him to work ten days to produce the suit of clothes worth $10, he 
now produces them by five days’ work, for he receives $20 for ten 
e days’ work, and, of course, $10 for fies days’ work. The manu- 
facturer has had his work reduced half, the laborer has had his 
‘increased double. But it is said that the tariff helps the laborer 
‘by doubling his pay, because it builds up manufactures every- 


Pipe eae te we pa : 


we Bie Fie 
ee iy 


oubles the value of the manufacturer’s product ought to double 
he value of the laborer’s pay; but the tariff takes his money and 
uts it in the pockets of the manufacturer and pays him in prom- 
es which it never redeems. 

‘There are woolen goods, as we have shown in the report of the 


aken 100 per cent. for the greater ease of illustrating the effect. 
he benefits of the tariff all go one way. They go from the con- 
umer to the manufactuer, but not from the manufacturer to the 
onsumer, Suppose that the tax on the 60,000,000 of consumers 
mounts to $10 per head, then it is a tax of six Tuindred millions; 
it is only $5 per head, it is. three hundred millions taken 
ut of the pockets of the consumer. and put into the pockets of 
he manufacturers. The tax on the four hundred! millions of 
goods imported goes into the public Treasury; the tax levied on 
domestic manufactures, by raising their price, goes into the 


gest injury that it inflicts upon them. 


f the values of our exports. Remember that the great body of 
ur exports are agricultural products. It has been so through 


is country year by year are agricultural products. Cotton 
first, then breadstufis, pork, beef, butter, cheese, lard, These 


ite ‘to get his suit of clothes. Now tell me if ten days of his labor 


“where. But if that is true, the tariff at the same time that it 


Ee arraittes, bearing duties from 100 to 180 per cent., but I have 


pockets of the manufacturers, aa 
- But the excessive taxation imposed on the people is not the 


~The greatest evil that is inflicted by it is in the destruction © 


ur whole history. From 75 to over 80 per cent. of the exports © 


2 


? een m Coe oy Rey a! 
C ROGER @. MILLS 


are the things that keep up our foreign trade, and when you put 
on or keep on such duties as we have now—war duties which were 
- regarded as so enormous even in the very midst of hostilities 
that they were declared to be temporary—when you put on or 
' retain those duties, they limit and prohibit importation, and that — 
_Jimits or prohibits exportation. It takes two to make a trade. All 
the commerce of all thc countries of the world is carried on by an 
exchange of commodities—commodities going from the country — 
where they are produced at the least cost to seek a market in those 
countries where they can either not be produced at all or where 
they can be produced only at tho highest cost of production. | 
We are the great agricultural country of the world, and we 
have been feeding the people of Europe, and the people of Europe — 
have got to give us in cxchange the products of their labor in their 
shops; and when we put on v«xcessive duties for the purpose of — 
prohibiting the importations of thoir goods, as a necessary result 
we put an excessive duty upon the exportation of our own agri- — 
cultural products. And what does that do? It throws our surplus 
products upon’ our own mar!zets at home, which become glutted 
and oversupplied, and prices go down. So | is 18 with the people of 

Europe who are manufacturing and producing things that we can- — 

not produce, but which we want. Their products are thrown upon — 

their home markets, which are glutted and oversupplied, and their i 
: prices likewise go down. And whenever, from any cause, prices — 
start up in Europe, our tariff being levied mainly by specific duties 
upon quantity, not upon value, the tariff goes down, and then we : 
see large importation and, as a result, large exportation. it ae : 
Then we see a rise in Ccaiieed products; then we see the ~ 
circulation of money ail through the whole of our industrial system; : 
oe we see our people going to work, our manufactories starting up, 
and prosperity in every part of the land. Witness the history of 
_ 1880. After the long depression lasting from 1873 to 1880 prices” 

_ suddenly rose in Europe. The prices of all the products which they ~ 
export to us began to rise in the latter part of the year. What was — 
the result? As prices rose there the tariff went down, the obstirwenl 
tions became lower, and the imports came in. - 

Our imports increased about $200,000,000 in one year. What 
‘was the result of that? Our exports increased largely. The prices "4 
of wheat, of cotton, of corn, of all the products that we export 
went up; not only the prices of that which was exported, but also — 
the prices of that which was consumed at home. We exported in 
ia 1880 $685,000,000 worth of agricultural products, and in 1881 $7. 
000,000, During last year we exported only $523,000,000 worth of 


Ue Cette Rieter Ree eK Mh MT ERS he EP Set ye Ne i ON 
\ Yar ele st amr ~ / ot 


: ROGER Q. MILLA. | a 


OF natural products. About 15 per cent. of our agricultural prod- 
ucts have to seek a foreign market, and in 1881 the proportion rose 

- to 20 per cent. 
I have a letter here, which I will not stop to read, from the stat- 
istician of the Agricultural Department, in which he places the 
value of the present crop of the United States at three billions five 


hundred millions, and he says that if the prices of 1880 now obtained | 


the value of the crops would be in excess of four billion dollars. 
_ Here, then, is a loss, according to this estimate, of not less than 
~__ $500,000,000. How much greater the value of the crop would be he 
_ does not say. 
: But when we see the prices of agricultural products in 1881, 
_-we exported $730,000,000 worth of agricultural products, and then 
compare them with 1887, when the export of agricultural products 
fell to $523,000,000, we can form some estimate of the great loss of 
our farmers by stopping exportation. In 1881 wheat was worth 
$1.19 per bushel; it is now worth 68 cents. In 1881 corn was worth 
_ 63 cents per bushel; it is now worth 44 cents. The exports of our 
E: agricultural products have fallen during the last year far below those 
sof 1881, and the prices have correspondingly fallen. 
: __ If the prices of 1881 obtained to-day the wheat crop of 1887 would 
- be increased over its present value $232,000,000, and if by exporta- 
tion to foreign markets we could have each year since 1881 realized 
a the price of that year, the wheat-growers would have realized on 
q a annual crops since then a thousand millions of dollars more 


ey 
ae 2 


a BP Nouble that. Some part of the low prices is to be attributed to large 
_erops, but by far the greater cause is the restriction of the market 
a for the sale of farm products. 

If the tariff imposed a revenue duty sufficient to obtain money 
enough to support the Government but not high enough to impede 
4 ‘importation, then our foreign trade would grow rapidly and our 
“ _ agricultural products would find ample markets and good prices. 
- But just as long as we continue to stop importation by high duties, 
E just so long will we stop exportation; and our agricultural surphis 
s i ‘continuing to increase and its markets being limited the prices must 


: bine price of what he sells. 
. ‘ goods be imported it will stop our manufactories—that it will turn 


as our people out of employment or reduce their wages. It will do 
nothing of the sort. What will we import, and what did we import 


But it is insisted that if we lower the duties and let foreign 


Se a a ie 


, are i. ‘ws 


machinery worked more constantly, and their operatives were all 


the Government was supported by direct taxation, not more than 10 Lig 
as cent, of all the manufactured eels: consumed by all the is 


ROGER Q. MILLS. 


when prices rose and the duties fell in 1880? We imported more cot 
the same articles which we were importing before the prices rose, 

We will import more of the things we cannot produce or which 
can be produced cheaper in other countries than at home. If we 
look to our table of imports in 1880, we will see that over sixty 
millions of the increase was of articles in the free-list and about one 


hundred and twenty-five millions in the dutiable list. The in- 
crease of imports free of duty will not hurt the manufacturer or the 


laborer. 
W always import more coffee, more tea, more of everything ‘het 


y 


“is required to meet the wants of the people when prices are high, 


because when prices are high the country is more prosperous and the" 
people are better able to buy and pay for what they want, and the 
tariff is then lowerand dutiable articles are more largely imported to 
compete for sale with the home products. In looking through our 
consumption statement ve see that a certain line of articles areim- 
ported from year to year; then observing the periods when prices 
are high and the tariff low you will see that the same articles are 


- imported in larger quantities. 


Our manufacturers do not then stop. They go on with increased — 
activity. They did not stop in 1880 when the large importation set 
in. It gave them renewed life; their wheels flew faster, their 
employed. Why is this? Why, Mr. Chairman, we can produce at 
least 90 per cent. of all the manufactures consumed i in this country — 
more cheaply at home than they can be produced anywhere in the S, 
world and delivered here, This 90 per cent. which we can produce — - 
at a lower cost than any other people can will not be hurt by im-| 
portation, — - a - 

‘T have here a letter from the Chief of the Bureau of Statishies: es 


is $ri ich shows that in 1850 with a low tariff the consumption of = * 


domestic manufactures in the United States was 88.39 per cent. of the # 
whole, and of imports 11.61 per cent. In 1860, with a still lower — 
tariff, our home manufacturers constituted 87. 57 per cent., and the 
consumption of imports was 12.43 percent. In 1870 the consumption _ 3 
of domestic manufuctures was 93.14 per cent. and 6.86 per cent. ore e 
Ca 
Y 


imports, and in 1880 were consumed 92.58 per cent. of home manu- 


factures and 7.42 per cent. of foreign manufactures. Now, it is evi- | 


_ dent from these figures that under any Onan ee we can hold 90 


per cent. of the market against the world. ~<: gs & 
~~ If we had no tariff, if all the custom-houses were torn down. and 


iw BG 
a 


ROGER e “TIS OAT 


es people would be imported into the country. Senator Sherman, in a 
speech delivered three months ago, quoted a statement of ex-Consul — 


_ Dudley, that nine-tenths of all the articles of manufacture consumed 
_ by the people could be procured as cheaply here asin England. He 

. - indorsed the statement as correct. J deny the accuracy of the state- 
- ment. If he had said that nine-tenths of all the manufactures con- 
_ sumed in the United States could be produced more cheaply here 
_ than in England he would have been nearer the truth. If nine-tenths 


of all the manufactures. consumed here are cheaper here than in 


_ England it is because they are produced at a lower cost. Then what 

~ objection does he see to reducing the tariff ? 

_ they constantly beseeching Congress not to ruin them by reducing 
_the war rates? They can produce nine-tenths of their products and 

__ Sell them cheaper than their rivals in England, but they do not do 
pit. If they do sell nine-tenths of their products cheaper than Eng- 


lish manufacturers, why is it that they and our friends on the other 


- side not only resist every effort that we make to reduce these war 
- taxes, but are asking now that the tariff on woolen goods shall be 
Ps raised ? Why are they demanding that woolen cloth shall be raised 
_ to 128 per cent., women’s and children’s dress goods to 102, flannels 
e~ to 121 per Cont, hats to 134 per cent., and [knit goods to 185 per 
cent. ? Why do they resist the reduction of the duty on steel rails 


cotton goods ? 

_ The manufacturer is not so much interested now in the foreign 
- market asthe farmer. Less than 2 per cent. of the $7,000,000,000 of 
his annual product goes to the foreign market; but the farmer sends 
ES 15 per cent. of his products there, and would send a larger per cent. 


cs for the sale of 98 per cent. of his product. Then is it not a matter of 
- the deepest concern to him to have that home market prosperous ? 


able to purchase and pay for everything they want? Would not 


manufacturers make more money by selling their goods to Ameri- 
o can people with pockets full of money than to wild Indians who had 


i For his goods, and that he have such market both at home and 


Re Geese ae : 
pa saa 3 et SEE er eNO 


What use have our manufacturers for the tariff at all? Why are 


to $11 a ton? Why oppose the slight reduction we propose in ' ii 


if the way was open. The manufacturer looks to the home market 


Is not every one who sells goods interested in having customers . 


a haan 0) that his customers may be as many as possible, that they ve 


Rowe ROGER Q. MILLS. 


and his dependence being almost exclusively on the home market, 
he should do everything in his power to help his customers grow in 
wealth. Who are his customers? The farmers. How are they to 
become prosperous and grow in wealth? By selling their products 
in the markets that demand them and offer for them the highest 
price. Where are those markets? In foreign countries. But those 
markets are closed to him unless Congress will let him bring back 

the goods he will obtain in exchange. If to-day the barriers against 
importation were broken down and our imports should increase 
from two to three hundred millions, that importation would create 
a demand for that amount of agricultural products to be exported _ 
to pay for them, and that would increase the price of farm products 

all through the land. It would distribute money among the 
whole sixty millions of people, placing a dollar beside every want __ 
with which it could be satisfied. He would find that he hada 
market then at home far more valuable to him than it would be with 
the 10 per cent. of importations kept out and the prices of all farm ~~ 
' products forced down so low that the farmers would have nothing _ 
- with which to buy. Sa 
| But, Mr. Chairman, it is said that this will injure our labor. It 
is said a high tariff makes high wages for labor. It is said if we 
reduce the tariff wages must be reduced. How is it high tariff 
‘makes high wages for labor? How can it be explained ? Why, they — 
say, as a matter of course, if you increase the value of the domestic 
product, the manufacturer is able to pay higher wages. Unquestion- 
ably he is, but does he do it? No, Mr. J ay Gould, with his im- 
mense income from his railroad property, is able to pay his boot- 
black $500 a day, but does he do it? Oh, no; he pays the market 
price of the street. He gets his boots acieed and pays his nickel © a 
like a little man. [Laughter.}] Mr. Vanderbilt, from the income 
arising from the interest on the immense amount of bonds of the __ 
Federal Government he has got, can afford to pay his hostler $10,000 
ayéar. Heis able to do it; his bonds enable him to do it, butdoes 
he do it? Oh, no; he goes out into the market and employs his 
labor at the market value, and pays the same price that the humblest —__ 
citizen in New York does. Be 
_ High tariff does not regulate wages. Wages are regulated by 
demand and supply and the capacity of the laborer to do the work 
for which he is employed. If high tariff regulated wages, howisit 
_ the wages in the different States of the Union are different while the bee 
tariff is all the same from Maine to California ? In every part of the oe ; 
territory of the United States the tariff is the same. How is it the ae 
wages are not the same? How is that wages in the different locali- _ oy 


% ae 7 


¥ an 


saeon hte oe 
Poth lint iaeenteett 


bal * 


or: 


ROGER Q. MILLS. gee 


ties in the different States are different? ‘What is the cause? What 
is it which disturbs the tariff and prevents it from fixing a high rate 
_ of wages all over the country for labor? 


We find by the census the rate of wages in the cotton industry is | 


lower in Rhode Isiand than in Pennsylvania, and we find the wages 
in the iron business are higher in Rhode Island than in Pennsylvania. 


Why is that so? It is not the tariff that does it, it is thedemand ~ 
and supply of the people to do the work demanded of them. ‘There 
~ are more cotton operatives in Rhode Island and the supply is greater, 


and therefore the wages are lower. The same thing is true about 
the iron business in Pennsylvania. The wages of cotton operatives 


in Pennsylvania are higher because there are fewer in Pennsylvania — 


than in the State of Rhode Island. Itis not the tariff that regulates 
the wages. Well, what is it that fixes the high rate of wages in this 
uae yt 


- It is admitted by all who are well informed on this subject that 


~~ our rate of wages is higher than anywhere else in the world, that 

England is higher than France, and that the rate of wages is higher 
in France than in Germany. Why is this? Germany and France 
. -" both have a protective tariff to guard against the free-trade labor of 
s England. What then is it that makes higher wages? It is coal and 
4 _ steam and machinery. It is these three powerful agents that multi- 
ae ply the product of labor and make it more valuable, and high rate of 


‘wages means low cost of product. A high rate of wages means that | 


PRET LOAN EO EBSA 


per heR 


_ fifty years demonstrates that as clearly and as conclusively as any | ny 


- mathematical problem can be demonstrated. 


; . old methods, to Make eight yards of cloth in one a, They got 20 
~ cents a day: a dollar for the whole five. The labor cost of the 
cloth was 124 cents a yard, and calculating 300 working days in a 
year the whole product of these five cheap laborers was 2,400 yards 


'_ together to produce cloth, five persons to-day in New England pro- 
‘duce 140,000 yards of cloth. The labor cost of the cloth is 1.08 cents 


cents a day, is $287 per annum for each. 


-erease in the rate of wages, and the further result was a great 


_ peryard. The wages of labor, instead of being $60 a year, or 20! 


‘Fifty years ago, Mr. Edward Atkinson shows, it required five | 
__ persons, two carders, two spinners, and one weaver, working by the | 


E - cheap labor has got to go; and the history of our country in the last | ae 
% 


oe £ mel 
ites Eo ee cee sik aA - 4 


; of cloth; but when coal andsteam and machinery were harnessed pee 


a _ The result of the labor-saving machinery used was an enormous | A 
‘increase in productive capacity. The result of that was a great in- - 


Sr 


_ decrease in the cost of production. The old hand-wheel and the old . 
“a ‘ methods of. labor have had to depart before the all-conquerlng march .. 


oe oem 6. aes 


~ amount of product of the article drove them out of the field. It is 

_ not the rate of wages, it is the article which the labor makes and the 
cost at which that article can be produced—the lower cost—which 
_ drives the rival article out of the market. Such is the history which : 

has been written in our-country in the last half century. = 
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Edward Atkinson, one of the clearest 
thinkers and writers on political economy of the present day, in his : 
little book on The Distribution of Products, lays down the principle 
_ that high rate of wages means low cost of product, and low rate of 
wages means high cost of product. He says that ‘‘the cheapest 
- man is the one who works the greatest amount of machinery with 
the least stops.” I read a paragraph from his book, on page 44: 


of coal and steam and machinery. They had to go because the small , : 3 
= 


| In any given country like the United States, where the people are substan- 
tially homogeneous, where the means of intercommunication are ample, where 

_ there are no hereditary or class distinctions, and where there is no artificial ob- 
_ struction to prevent commerce, high rates of wages in money will be the natural 
and therefore necessary result of low cost of production in labor. 


Sr eet ES 5 ect Che Ty Bes ie t 
Aig ? . 2 AS ns oh 2 
<A dea? | ts ei Ae a oe, -- 


ap 


+ 
2 eo 


Again, on page 46, he says: 


> 


. “a ID arte - 
oy cuneate ele Che Veit Me ar 
pe PL SL Pe tes ae 


4 Hence, it follows that although the total production of any given thing may 

~ not be concentrated at the very best point, it will yet be found to be true that 
where the conditions are the best, the cost, measured in terms of days of labor, ee 
will be lowest, and the wages, measured in terms of money per day, will be the ae 
highest, the high money wages being the necessary consequence of the low 
labor cost. Conversely, low rates of money wages are the natural and necessary — Po 
result of a high labor cost of production. ea 


pare eae 


PCF ag oe he! 
=e ee 


Now, then, ‘‘it follows,” he says, on page 56, 


That the nation which has diminished the quantity of human labor in 
greatest measure by the application of machinery produces goods at the lowest 
cost; and by exchange with the hand-working nations, who still constitute the 
- majority of the people of the world, is, by way of such exchange, enabled to 
pay the highest rate of wages in money, because their goods are made at the - 
lowest labor cost. 


__~ In order to prove that fact Mr. Atkinson made an investigation 
into the condition of two old manufacturing houses in the State of 
New Hampshire; he compared two periods—1830 with the year 1884. 4 
He found that in 1830 the wages per annum were $164 in gold to each — 
operative. This increased until 1884, when it amounted to bt By 
gold. | 


Nays i Sasa sae ee reek ee mPa Oe 
x ha path ; 
: = — 


“ROGER Q. MILLS. 15 


‘number of Fat of cloth produced by each operative was 4,321 per 
annum, while in 1884, mainly by the aid of improved machinery, it 
had been increased to 28,032 yards. Thecost of the labor per yard 
- was 1.9 cents in 1830, and but 1.07 cents in 1884. 
. Let us now reduce these differences to percentages and compare 
them in that form. There was, as I have shown, a great increase in 
the productive capacity of each operative, but there was a decrease 
in operatives per thousand spindles of 60 per cent. 
_ The pound of material turned out by each spindle or operative was 


taken as a unit of measurement, and Mr. Atkinson’stable shows that 


_ the pounds that each spindle turned out had increased 22 per cent., 
and the pounds that each operative turned out in a day had increased 

190 per cent.; the pounds that each operative turned out per hour in- 
creased 240 per cent. The wages of operatives per hour (for the 
- number of hours were made less) increased 240 per cent. The 
__ wages of the operative per annum had increased 64 per cent., 
and per hour 94 per cent., while the labor cost per yard had decreased 

41 percent. The other house showed thesame condition. It showed 

, that productive efficiency had increased in spindles 276 per cent., in 

= “pounds per operative 214 per cent., while wages increased 77 per 
as -cent., and labor cost per yard decreased 44 per cent. 
s ; This great revolution in production, wages, and cost is fot the 
— work of the tariff, but of coal, steam, and machinery. These three 
a powerful agents have produced these marvelous results. The 
= effects inevitably follow the cause—high rate of wages because so 
much more service is rendered the employer, low cost of product 
-_ because so much more is done in a given time. I repeat it, the tariff 
has had nothing to do with bringing about the great change, and itis 
2 Seen utterly impotent, to increase the rate of wages. 

But, Mr. Chairman, I want to call the attention of the committee 
~ toastatement found in the report of the United States Census. This 
+ is the report in reference to the wages in the manufacturing indus- 
tries of the country,.and I call special attention to the report of an 
- ax-manufacturing establishment in Connecticut on page 158. This 


=. 
x) ce 
a 


: ~ gentleman who makes the report compares the operations of his 


house from his books in 1840 with 1880. In steel-fitting, in ax-mak- 
~ ing, each operative turned out 600 pieces: per day in 1840. In 1880 
~ each operative turned out 1,250 pieces per day. Each operative re- 
 eeived in 1840 24 cents per hundred pieces, and received in 1880 20~ 


= cents per hundred pieces. He earned in 1840 $1.44 a day, and in : . = 


~ 1880, though he received less for each piece, he earned $2.50 per day. 


t ~yaee 


oa “And this table includes all the different parts of the manufacture 


r 4 eee 
eo ee 


i 


Pa Nar 


16 ROGER Q. MILLS. 


grinding, painting, backing, etc.; and in every department of this 
manufacture in making axes the same rule is observed—that is, the 
increased productive power increases the wages and decreases the 
cost of the product. That follows as shadow follows substance, as 
night follows day. It is the effect following the cause. It is the 
cause producing the effect—that as the laborer is more efficient and 
more valuable to his employer, as he turns out more work, he is en- 
titled to and receives more pay. He receives more wages by the day, 
even though he is paid less for each piece of work he turns out. “3 
Now, was.the increase of the daily wages of these operatives due 


to the tariff? Let the manufacturer answer. He says: ‘‘ The follow- 


Ing table shows the results of labor-saving machinery, together with 
the increase in the efficiency of labor in the manufacture of axes, 
from 1840 to 1880.” When I saw these tables, proving the principle 
so clearly presented and so strongly enforced by Mr. Atkinson, I 
went to our very able and efficient chief of labor, Hon. Carroll D. 
Wright, and asked him to have a table like this in the Census Re- 
port prepared, and to send an intelligent agent into some of the 
oldest houses in the country and get a statement from their books 
and send it to me, that I might see if there was a different result in __ 
other establishments. I now give you the testimony of those houses 
- to add to the others. it : 
There are here seven establishments. The first one isin Massachu- 
setts. A comparison is instituted between 1849 and 1884, and the __ 
industry is cotton print cloth. Each operative made in 1849 in a 
this factory 444 yards per day; in 1884 he made 98.2 yards, an 
increase of productive power of 120 per cent. What wages didhe — 
get? The average daily [earnings of the laborer in 1849 were 66 
cents, and in 1884 $1. His wages increased 50 per cent. Thelabor 
cost of the product decreased 32 per cent. a 
In that same establishment in 1849 the wages of weavers were 65 
cents a day, and each man turned out 113 yards of cloth. In 1884 
the wages had risen to $1.06, and each weaver turned out 273 yards ~ 
of cloth. 5 ea 
In the second house, also in Massachusetts, manufacturing printed __ 
cloths, each laborer in 1850 produced 42 yards; in 1884 he produced __ 
102 yards, an increase of 142 per cent. His earnings were 65centsa 
day in 1850 and $1.05 in 1884. The increase in wages was 61 per 
cent. The decrease in the labor cost of the article was 33 percent. 
The third house, manufacturing sheeting in Massachusetts, showed __ 
that each laborer in 1852 produced 41 yards and in 1886 73 yards of — 
cloth. His productive efficiency increased 77 per cent. His wages 


+ OY eee 


Pe, ee eR ee 
tS Pog eee wea 


product. aia 
Mr. Wright, Chief of the Labor Bureau, instituted a most pains- 


ae ae Loa list sae evs a Sa rae Spee 


“ROGHR Q. MILLS. 17 


increased 49 per cent. The labor cost of the cloth decreased 15 per 


cent. 

In the fourth house, in New Hampshire, manufacturing print 
cloth, each laborer in 1852 produced 42.5 yards and in 1886 103 yards. 
The increase in productive capacity was 142 per cent. The increase 
in wages was 56.7 per cent., and the labor cost per yard decreased 35 
per cent. 

Without going all through these figures the facts as to each one 
of these houses show in every instance that the productive efficiency 


of the laborer had increased, and that corresponding with that the — | 


wages had increased and the cost of the product had decreased. 
Now, then, the tariff had nothing to do with any of these results. 
During this time we had high tariffs and low tariffs, but whether 


high tariff or low tariff, or no tariff, the productive efficiency con- ° 


tinued to increase, the multiplication of production by the power of 


machinery continued to increase, and wages rose with it, and the ~ 


cost of the product sunk. So that the tariff conferred no benefit on 


the laborer; none whatever. 


But now let us see what effect a reduction of the nies will have 


by letting in the goods of England and other foreign countries into 


our markets to compete with our people and to endanger the laborers 
of our country, as it is charged it willdo. I say the same proposi- 


tion for which I have been contending is demonstrated again when 
we compare the laborer of this country with the laborer of England. 
We produce cheaper than in England because a high rate of wages 
—. means low cost of product, and a higher rate of wages means lower 


cost of product, and the highest rate of wages means lowest cost of 


taking examination into the rates of labor in England and Massa- 


chusetts a few years ago, and showed the rates of labor higher in 
this country than in England: 12 per cent. higher in cotton mauu- 


facture, 25 per cent. in the manufacture of woolens, 26 per cent. in 


iron and steel, 128 per cent. in boots and shoes. That would seem to — 


indicate, according to the philosophy which has been taught in this 


country by protectionists for many years, that we are on the road to — 


ruin because our rate of labor is higher than in England and other 


: _ countries. But the reverse of that proposition is true; and the fact 
that the rate of wages is higher here than in England shows that 
England is distanced in the great industrial contest into which she 


Be Gee entered. 


_ Now let me give you an instance here in boots and shoes. If we 


fae 


pay so.much higher wages in producing boots and shoes, if the prop- 


ROGER Q. MILLS. oe de 


osition we hear on the other side be true, we cannot enter into any : 
contest with Great Britain when we pay 128 per cent. higher wages 
than she does. Yet we import no boots and shoes at 30 per cent. | 
_ duty from England. We make the cheapest boots and shoes and the 
finest made in the world. In that England cannot contest with us; 
and the fact that the rate of wages is so much higher here than in ~ 
England shows that she is far behind in the race. 
Let us see. Here is a gentleman writing in Harper’s Magazine in 
- 1885, a very able article entitled ‘‘A pair of shoes.” He takes the 
history of the hide from the cow and follows it through all its muta- 
tions into the finest products of manufacture. Thisisnotanarticle 
on wages; but it contains a paragraph on wages. ay. 
- Mr. Cox. By whom is the article written? 
Mr. Mitts. Mr. Howard Newhall is the writer. He says: 


American ladies’ shoes wholesaling at $1.50 per pair cost for labor of mak- 
ing 25 cents. English ladies’ shoes wholesaling at $1.50 per pair cost for labor 
of making 34 cents. American men’s shoes wholesaling at $2.60 per pair cost 

- for labor of making 33 cents. English men’s shoes wholesaling at $2.60 per 
pair cost for labor of making 50 cents. In the report of the Massachusetts be 
bureau of statistics for 1884 the general average weekly wage in Massachusetts ee 
is given as 128.9 per cent. higher than in Great Britain. Thegeneralaverage 
weekly wage in Massachusetts is given as $11.63 per week, and in Great 
Britain $9.08. 


fin 


= 

Now, what is the solution of all this? Whatdoesitmean? In __ 
Massachusetts wages are 128.9 per cent. higher than they are in “a 
Great Britain, but the labor cost of a pair of ladies’ shoes im Massa- 
‘chusetts is less than the labor cost of a like pair of shoesin Great Xe 
Britain. The cost is 25 cents in Massachusetts against 34 cents in 
_ England. The labor cost of men’s shoes in Massachusetts is 83 cents 
per pair; the labor cost of men’s shoes in England is 50 cents. Ifour 
people are to be injured by the importation of English shoesintothis 
- country the English shoe must be produced at a lower cost than the a 
American shoe; otherwise it cannot take the market. eg 
It is not the rate of wages in England and in America respective- 
ly, $5.08 against $11.63, that we have to consider, but it is the labor —_ 
cost of the pair of shoes. Now, the man holds the market whocan __ 3 
sell his goods cheapest, and the man can sell cheapest who gets  — 


his goods at the lowest cost, and that is the man in Massachusetts. eh 
_ What, then, does this difference of wages mean, $11.63 per week in 
is Re eeachunctis against $5.08 in England? It simply meansincreased ~~ 
productive efficiency; it means that the productive efficiency of the oie 


Ee ages 


American workman engaged in this industry is greater than that of 
the British workman by 128.9 per cent. 

In order for the American to earn his $11.63 a week he makes 35 
pairs of men’s shoes in a week; the Englishman to earn his $5.08 a 
week makes 10 pairs of men’s shoes. In order for the American 


workman to earn his $11.63 per week he makes 46 pairs of ladies’ 
shoes; in order for the Englishman to earn his $5.08 per week he 
makes 15 pairs of ladies’ shoes. The tariff did not make the Ameri- — 
can workingman’s wages $11.63 per week. It was the number of — 


shoes he made that regulated his wages, and superior skill in using 


_ machinery gave him the capacity to make more shoes than the 


iy 

. Z 

3 

¥ 
rH 
ay 
Oh 
ay 
ey, 
Pies 
py 


Englishman. 


ROGER Q. MILLS. | 19° 


Here is the solution of the whole question, and the principle is the _ : 


same that I have been supporting all along. That principle is that 
the higher rate of wages means a higher productive power; it is in- 
creased pay for increased work; it is not the tariff; it is more work; 


it is more efficient work; it is better work; it is cheaper work. It is 
that that holds the market; and it holds the boot and shoe market of 
' this country against the importation of a single pair of shoes from 


Great Britain, notwithstanding the fact that wages there are $5.08 a 


week as against $11.63 in Massachusetts. 
Mr. Hersert.. Free hides also help you out on that point. 


Mr. Mis. England also has free hides. A few years ago, in se 


1879, our English friends across the water took alarm about the 
growth and development of our cotton industry in the United States, — 
and they sent an expert—a gentleman thoroughly conversant with 


the cotton business.of England—to the United States to make a : 


_ thorough and searching investigation into the whole business Of 
cotton manufacture in this country, and to report to them whether ~ 


their industry was imperiled by that of the United States. That 


this country. He made a thorough and searching investigation, and 


3 gentleman went to New England, the seat of the cotton industry in ~ 


in every instance he showed that we could produce cotton goods at a oe 


lower labor cost than they could be produced at any point in Great 
_ Britain. I have here the tabular statement that he gave to his 


people when he returned. 


The following are the rates of wages for weaving and spinning 


cloths in some of the principal districts of England and America, as es 
' shown by his report: 33 


A piece 28 inches, 56 reeds, 14 picks (?), 60 by 56, 58 yards, costs at ia 


pe eveod indertvne, in England, 24.68 cents’ to weave; in Rhode 
___ Asland it costs 16.82 cents. At Blackburn, in England, it costs 25.4 
ee sents; at Providence, R. I., it costs 17.26 cents; at Stockport, ne | 


Poe ROGER Q. MILLS. 


Sand. 25.4 cents; at Fall River, 19.96 cents; at Hyde, England, 25.28 — 
cents; at Lowell, 19.96 cents. In every instance the labae cost of the wf 5 
_ production of the cotton goods is lower here than in England. Now 7a 
let us turn to the summary. At Fall River the wages in a pound of ‘ 
Sprint cloth, about 7 yards, is 6.907 cents; at Lowell it is 6.882 cents; 
~ in Rhode Island it is 6.422; in Pennsylvania, 6.44; in England, 6.96 = 
~ cents. In every place in the United States, in Pennsylvania, Massa- oe 
- chusetts, and Rhode Island, the labor cost of producing a pound of ee 
_ print cloth was lower than at any point in Engiand. - Oars 
_A Memper. And the wages higher. 
Mr. MiLuiken. Then what harm does the tariff do? . ee 
Mr. Mitts. What good does it do? It enables you to make ; 
- “trusts,” combinations, and ‘‘ pools” by keeping foreign products out 
of the market. [Applause on the Democratic side. ] an 
Mr, Mituicen, I will answer the gentleman if he will give me  ~— 
- the opportunity. I will tell him what good it does, [Cries of ~~ 

“Regular order!’ a 

Mr. Mitts. Now, Mr. Chairman, when we come to look at the 
~~ last column of these figures the picture changes. What do we find md 
- when we come to look at the total product, with the cost of the ma- 
~ terial thrown in, and all the other elements besides labor ? While — 
the labor cost is lowest in the United States, where the rate of wages 
- is highest, yet when we come to examine the cost of the material, 
- England beats us, because she produces the goods at a total cost 
lower than ours. It is not the labor that causes this difference; itis 
_ the cost of the material. The machinery by which you run your — 

- establishments costs you 45 per cent.; your dye-stuffs are more costly 
_ than in England; all these things which enter into the manufacture 
__ of goods cost more here than on the other side. But do not charge — 
_ this increased cost to labor. You are not paying the laborer, in pro- 
_ portion to the work that he does, as much as he receives in England, 
; Mr. Brumm. Will the gentleman allow me—— 

Several MzemBers. Oh, no. : [Cries of ‘‘ Regular order!’] 
Mr, Minus (to Mr. BRumm). Go ahead. ‘ 
-. Mr. Brum. Did I understand the gentleman to say that the ae 
- of cotton in England was less than the cost of cotton in this country? 

, Mr. Minis. You understand me to say that the labor cost of pro- 
_ ducing a pound of print-cloth was lower in this country than in Eng- — 
land. You understood me further tosay that the total cost, including 
~ materials and everything else, is lower in England than in the United 
States. ; bof 
_ Mr. Brum, Therefore, does not that say that cotton, beingtheraw  _ 


aan 4 Gta ein, Skt AA aoe te) a. VOR, ee ee PE Wi Behe o 1 7.7, 
: Bn are : rer as eo 37 pa tae ea oe ¢ : a re. vive Ah 
gi ia) . ‘ Ta od 7 S@ A 7 = 
Y Ce = 4 . ; ~ S , $A wes 


‘ROGER Q. MILLS. OS 


material out-of which the cotton goods are made, must be ower in 
England than in this country? 
Mr. Mitus. Oh, no; not at all; of course not. 
Mr. Keuury. Mr. Shoinnane ) 
" Mr. Minus. It means that England procures her machinery at less 
ee cost than we do ours.’ It means that England produces thedyes which _ 
~ enter into the manufacture of these goods cheaper because untaxed, ey 
That is what it means. aes 
Mr. Keuiey. I protest against these interruptions of the gentle- ae 


-._ man’s speech. 

& Mr. Mus. Idonot. [Applause on the Democratic side.] : 
Bes. Mr. Kewitey. The gentleman, as the organ of his party, is ex- 
a pounding its doctrine, and these interruptions are, in my judgment, 


impertinences. [Laughter. ] 
Mr. Mints. Now, Mr. Chairman, when we come to look at the — 
total cost of this pound of calico cloth we find that at Fall River itis — 
_ 14 cents (leaving off fractions); at Lowell, 14 cents; in RhodelIsland, _ 
11. cents; in Pennsylvania, 15 cents; in England, 12 cents. England — 
‘produces the goods at a total cost less than ours, and that gives her 
the market; but while the goods cost more here, she pays more in 
_— the form of wages. € 
Now, when this gentleman goes back home after this general sur- 
vey of the whole business he reports to his people elaborately. Ire- 
fer to this little book published in England, givento me by my friend, 
Hon. Carroll D. Wright, the Chief of the Bureau of Labor. He goes 
back and tells his people—— ae 


Be still, sad heart, and cease repining; vi 
Behind the clouds the sun is still shining. 


Eric people over in the United States, while they beat us in labor, 
while they can produce anything in the cotton business at a labor 
cost cheaper than we can, are, like Ephraim, “ joined to their idols.” 

_ They maintain high tariff on raw materials, and therefore the cost 
_ of materials entering into their manufactures is higher than with us. 
It will takea great revolution to change their minds on this subject; 
and as long as they hold to the policy of high tariff on materials which 

__ enter into manufactures you may go to sleep in security, for England _ ; 
ie holds the markets of the world. ar 

This is his language: 1 


ye 
ay 
Ao) 
> 
jo} 
4 
ae) 
< 
(qe) 
a 
= 
> 
@ 
2 
5 
(ae) 
ire 
<P) 
© 
B 
=} 
Se) 
cr. 
ro 
i=] 
=a 
oO 
rac) 
we) 
R 
12 
=] 
fae 
oO 
wa 
¢ 
ye} 
jo) 
as 
co 
“= 
far) 
— 
6B 
Ze) 
eer 
5 
cr 
[e) 
Leary 
S 
ed 


22 ROGER 0. MILLS: 


American manufactures will continue too high in price to compete with |Eng- e 
lish in all but exceptional cases. . ee 


Now, this statement in regard to the cotton industry is supported 
by a statement from Secretary Blaine. A few years ago, while he 
was Secretary of State, he said in his report, in speaking of the cot. — 
ton industry: 


Undoubtedly the inequalities in the wages of English and American opera- 
tives are more than equalized by the greater efficiency of the latter and their 
- longer hours of labor. If this should prove to be a fact in practice, as seems 
to be proven from official statistics, it will be a very important element in the 
establishment of our ability to compete with England for our share of the cot- 


e _ ton trade of the we 


 $6,000,000,000, and it was over $5,000,000,000 in 1880, it may be — 


Tam eine tom Mr. Blaine’s report on the cotton-goods trade 
of the world. {mee 

Mr. Charles 8. Hill, statistician of the State Department, makesa 
statement that I think is extravagant, and I would not quote it but 
he is a pronounced protectionist. I would not quote it if he 1 were, 2-8 
revenue reformer, because I think it is too strong. = 

In his argument before the Tariff Commission he says that our ~~ 
manufacturing product in 1882 was $8,000,000,000, made by 5,250,000 
hands, and that for the same time the product of England was 
-$4,000,000,000, made by 5,140,200 hands. In submitting this state- 
ment he says: ‘ 


Here is the positive proof that American mechanics in the aggregate accom — . A 
plish exactly double the result of the same number of British mechanics. They ~ a, 
are therefore very justly paid double in wages. Es 


I think he places the value of the whole product far too high in the a 
- United States. He places it at $8,000,000,000 in 1882, when our best 
statisticians put it at $7,000,000,000 now. If he would reduce itto — 


reasonable ; but to say the product was $6,000,000,000 in 1882, it would 
~ show still that the efficiency of our labor is from 40 per cent. to 50per _ 
cent. greater than that of Great Britain. Our consul at Tunstall, Eng- 
land, makes this report: That in cotton manufacures our productive __ 
capacity is 33 per cent. greater than England and 72 per cent. greater — 
than Germany. In woolen manufactures our productive capacity is 
23 per cent. greater than England and 40 per cent. greater than Ger- | 
many. In silk manufacture our productive capacity is 18 per cent. 

- greater than England and 82 per cent. greater than Germany. : 


at 


tid, Ue wy x. 


~ wise No ke te ei ca. 
‘hee ae 24 eset > 
Mp toe se 


ce! i Gil as a i ah Mr 7 Tew ei I go pe eh a tag one 


_Mr. Forp. That is the product per man ? 

Mr. Miuts. Yes, that is the product per man. Taking that as 
the average, how is it possible for these countries, where the rate of 
wages is low and the labor cost is high, how is it possible for those 
people to bring their product into our markets and drive ours out? 

I will refer to another instance before I close, and that is to a table 


which is to be found in the first annual report of the Bureau of Labor, 


pages 132 and 133, which gives the cost of spinning one pound of 
cotton yarn in England and in Germany. Germany has a protective 
duty on cotton yarn, while England welcomes the whole world to 


contest with her. 


England witha higher rate of wages exports annually into Ger- 
many cotton yarns to the value of ten to eleven millions of dollars, 
and that over a duty, if I remember rightly, of 10 per cent. The 
German manufacturers find that they can buy cotton yarns cheaper 
in England, where the rate of wages is much higher than in Germany. 


If we look at these tables we will see the reason. Here are two tables — 


giving the labor cost and whole cost of spinning cotton yarns of any 


-- number from 1 up to 177. One is the cost in Alsace, Germany, and 
the other in England, and they show that in every number the labor 
cost and the whole cost per pound are less in England than in Ger- 
many, notwithstanding the higher rate of wages which is paid in 

England. 


Is it the tariff that makes English wages higher than German? 


- Germany has the tariff, but England has the trade. If these state- 
-_ ments are true, what is there to prevent us from being the greatest 

manufacturing and exporting country of the world. We are the 
greatest agricultural people in the world. We exceed all others — 
in the products of manufacture, but we export next to nothing ~ 
of our product. Why should we not export the three hundred and 
seventy-five millions of cotton goods which England is now exporting? 


She buys her cotton from us, pays the cost of transportation to her 


_ factories, makes the goods, and sends them all over the world. That 
trade, at least the most of it, isours whenever we get ready to take it. 
Why should we not make and send out the hundred millions of 
~ woolen goods which she is annually exporting? We have the advan- 


_ tage of her in almost everything except cost of materials. Why should 


‘we not make and export the hundred millions of iron and steel which _ 2 
she is making and sending away annually? There is no reason ex- 
z ~ cept that high tariffs and trusts and combinations are in our way, — 


es and they muster all their forces to prevent us from taking the Die 


a euch our advantages entitle us to take. 


We are the greatest people in the world, We have the hisbees 


a r ee TS 3 3 ss 


ROGER Q. MILLS. oe ae 


TS eae oF 


rota rey 


ey oe 


Cot mr yea iar iat PsyD) iba tue alt aa CoN os 
iF se Nia ery NTE es ae 
7 i) sy 


standard of civilization; we have the highest a best diffusion of 


knowledge among our people. - 


We utilize the power of machinery more than any people in the: 
world. We produce by our labor more than any people in the world, — 
We have everything to command success in any contest over any 


rival, Weare the first cotton-producing country. We have wool, 


flax, hemp; our country is full of coal, and ores, and lumber, and 


yet with all these advantages over all others we have pursued a 
suicidal policy of protection, which has closed the markets of the 
world against us; and not content to stop here, we have plundered 
the great body of our agricultural people out of a large part of their 
wealth. [Applause. ] 


We must make a departure. Instead of laying on the burdens of ~ 
_ taxation upon the necessaries of life, instead of destroying our foreign 


commerce, we should encourage it as we would encourage our home 
commerce. We should remove every unnecessary burden. We 
should lay taxes to obtain revenue, but not restrict importation. We 


should place every material of manufacture on the free-list, startup ~ 


24 ROGER Q. MILLS Pete 


our fires, put our wheels in motion, and put all our people to work 


at good wages. 
A gentleman said here the other day, on the other side of the 


House, that our prosperity in this country was due to the tariff. I 


deny it. Our prosperity in this country is due to the intelligence of 


our labor, and to the unrestricted movements of our exchanges _ 


- among sixty millions of people at home. [Applause.] 


Mr. Nimmo, the Chief of the Bureau of Statistics a few years ago, 


in a most elaborate report upon the internal commerce of the coun- __ 
try stated that it exceeded our foreign commerce by twenty-five 


times its amount. Then the internal commerce of this country is 


equal to $35,000,000,000 annually. Every dollar of these products in- 
creases in value as they go from the point where they are produced — 
to the point where they are consumed. Take a ton of coal mined in — 

West Virginia, for instance, worth $1 at the mouth of the pit. Start 
it on its road to Texas, and every hundred miles it travelssome hand > 
touches it, some machinery transports it. It has got to pay the cost 
that increases as it goes, because its value is increased; and when it — 
is delivered finally in the little city where I live in Texas itis worth 


six to eight dollars a ton, and my neighbors buy and consume it be- 


cause it is cheaper to as than wood, and cheaper than they can ~ 


produce the coal themselves. 


_ And so, Mr. Chairman, it is with ‘the cotton produced in Texas fat 
and sent towards Rhode Island to be spun. Every mile on the road 
it traverses between the ppgueyy and the consumer increases ots aay 


~ wi * Es 

2 : t . ee me se 

& . ae teas aM PEI: 
’ Sin) >, ee, | Sa eae a 


NOH 


ee ee Dan ar Re ee ee BEY ey ee 
2h eee i LT gas Po : a ‘ - j N 


ROGER Q. MILLS. 25 


value, and it is this interchange of internal commerce of this coun- 
try, of $35,000,000,000 annually, that makes us rich and prosperous 


as a people, and we have grown ‘0, not by the aid of restrictions im- 


posed upon commerce with foreign countries, but absolutely in spite 
of it. [Applause.] va 


‘Our wealth would have been greater as a people if we had none of - 


_ these restrictions upon our commerce. We will increase wealth if 
. we lower the duties and let importations come in of those things 


which can be produced cheaper in other countries than in our own. 


We will increase the value of all of the agricultural products by 


such methods. They will diffuse and-scatter money amongst the 
laboring people throughout the country. It will set the wheels of 
machinery in motion, lay the foundation of happy homes, and a glad 
smile will light up the faces of the people in all sections of the coun- 
try at the returning and increased prosperity of the nation. [Ap- 
plause. ] 

The policy which is being pursued now may for awhile satisfy the 
demands of the capitalist who has money invested in the various 


- factories and enterprises of that kind throughout the country. They 


tt 


may be able by the aid of these pools and trusts and combinations 
which seem to be springing out of the earth all around us to secure 


for a time the capital invested; but what, I ask you, is to becomein 


the mean time of the poor laborer when they shut off their fires, 
‘ - when they turn him into the streets, and determine that they will 
limit the product of their establishments in order to keep up prices 
-. go as to save the profits on their investments ? What is to become 


of the cott6n and the iron and the wool, and all of the other interests 


_ that depend upon capital invested in manufacturing enterprises ? 


- -wheels‘are still, when the fires are banked, and their laborers wander- 


Where are our markets when our factories are closed, when the 


ing as paupers around the streets seeking employment which is not 
to be found anywhere in the land? And yet they call this the 


_ American policy. ; 


> ITrepel it, sir; it is not American. It is the reverse of American. 
That policy is American which clings most closely to the fundamental 
idea that underlies our institutions and upon which the whole super- 


structure of our Government is erected, and that idea is freedom— 


freedom secured by. the guaranties of government; freedom to think, 
to speak, to write; freedom to go where we please, select our own 


occupations; freedom to labor when we please and where we please; 
_ freedom to receive and enjoy all the results of our labor; free- 
- dom to sell our products, and freedom to buy the products of others, 
_ and freedom to markets for the products of our labor, without which — 


26 ROGER @ MILLS. 


_ of the tariff never passes beyond the pocket of the manufacturer, and ‘ 


a A A OTT Seek erg of as 5 pes ee) eee ib pe sins 


the freedom of labor is restricted and denied. Freedom from re- 
straints in working and marketing the products of our toil, except such 


-as may be necessary in the interest of the Government. Freedom. 


from all unnecessary burdens; freedom from all exactions upon the 
citizen except such as may be necessary to support an honest, effi_ 
cient, and economical administration of the Government that guar- 


-anties him protection to ‘‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;” 


freedom from all taxation except that which is levied for the support 
of the Government; freedom from taxation levied for the purpose of 
enriching favored classes by the spoliation and plunder of the people; 
freedom from all systems of taxation that do not fall with ‘‘ equal 
and exact justice upon all’’—that do not raise the revenues of goy- 
ernment in the way that is least burdensome to the people and with 
~ the least possible disturbance to their business. That, sir, is the 
American policy. [Applause.] _ 

Now another thing. I want to show that the tariff is not for ite 
benefit of the workingman. We will have many appeals made to us 
for sympathy on account of the workingman. I have taken from — 
the first annual report of the Commissioner of Labor and the report 
of the census on wages some figures given by manufacturers them- 
selves of the total cost of the product and thelabor costof the articles 
they are making. I have put the tariff duty by the side of them to 


-show whether in the little reductions we are asking in this billwe 
_ havef{gone beyond that pledge we as a party have made that we 


would not reduce taxation so low as to injure our laborers, oras not _ 
to cover the difference in cost of labor between American and foreign % 
products. ? is 
This will show, and I ask your attention to it, that the tariff is not ae 
intended to and does not benefit labor. It will show that the benefit — 


to the pockets of his workmen. 
I find in this report one pair of 5-pound blankets. The whole cost 


as stated by the manufacturer is $2.51. The labor cost he paid for _ 


making them is 35cents. The present tariff is $1.90. Now, here is 


$1.55 in this tariff over and above the entire labor cost of these <3 


é 
Sof 


blankets. Why did not that manufacturer go and give that money 
to the laborer? He is able todo it. Here isa tariff that gives him 
$1.90 on that pair of blankets for the benefit of his laborer, but not- — 
withstanding that the tariff was imposed for the benefit of American — - 
labor and to preserve high wages, every dollar of that tariff went 
into the manufacturer’s pocket. The poor fellow who made the — = 
blankets got 35 cents and the manufacturer kept the $1.90. © Me 


: ROGER Q. MILLS. 27 

Mr. Cram. Will the gentleman please state how much the 
committee has reduced that duty ? 

Mr. Miuus. To $1.00 from $1.90. 

Take another pair of 5-pound blankets. The total cost is $2.'70. 
The labor cost is 70 cents. The tariff is $1.98. Now, how strange it 
is that none of these sums that were intended for the laborer ever 
get beyond the pocket of the manufacturer. Why is it, when the 


‘American Congress enacted this legislation for the benefit of our 


labor, that every dollar of this aid intended for labor stops in the 
pockets of the manufacturer, who goes into the highways and hedges 
and hires his laborer at the lowest price for which he can get him in 
the market and then pockets the tariff benefits that we are told every 
day is intended for the laborer alone—for the‘benefit of labor ? 

Here is another pair of 5-pound blankets. The cost is $3.39. The 


labor cost paid by this manufacturer, he says himself, is 61 cents. 2 me 
The tariff is $2.55. In the pending bill we have left him $1.35, and — 


we have left the other man $1.08. And we have left all along not 
only enough to cover the difference, if there was any difference, be- 


_ tween the labor cost of production in Europe and the labor cost of 


production in this country, but we have left enough to pay for all the 
labor and a bonus besides. . 
Let us go on a little further. Here is 1 yard of flannel, weighing 
4 ounces; it cost 18 cents, of which the laborer got 3 cents; the 
tariff on it is 8 cents. How is it that the whole 8 cents did not get 


into the pockets of the laborer? Is it not strange that those who 
made the tariff and fastened upon the people these war rates in a 


‘time of profound peace, and who are now constantly assailing the 


Democratic party because it is untrue to the workingman, did not 


make some provision by which the generous bounty they gave — 


“od 
5 
2 


i: _ should reach the pocket of him for whom they said it was intended? 


They charge that we are trying to strike down the labor of the 


country. Why do they not see that the money they are taking out ~ oe 
of the hard earnings of the people is delivered in good faith to the | 


workman? 

One yard of cassimere weighing 16 ounces costs $1.38; the labor 
cost is 29 cents; the tariff duty is 80 cents. One pound of sewing 
silk costs $5.66; the cost for labor is 85 cents; the tariff is $1.69. One 


- gallon of linseed oil costs 46 cents; the labor cost is 2 cents; the tariff 
cost is 25 cents. One ton of bar-iron costs $31; the labor cost is $10; 


the tariff fixes several rates for bar-iron. I give the lowest rate, 


- $17.92. One ton of foundry pig-iron costs $11; the labor costs $1.64; 
the tarift is $6.72. 


None of these tariff rates go to the laborer. The road is blocked 


iv. . ” Og A ee np tf ess 
oe eth 


up. They cannot pass the pocket of the manufacturer. This “great — 
American system” that is intended to secure high wages for our 
laborers is so perverted that all its beneficence intended for the poor 
i. workman stops in the pocket of his employer, and the laborer only 
¥ gets what he can command in the open market for his work. 


Let us take Bessemer-steel rails. Weare told that the steel-rail © 
industry is in great danger of utterly perishing away and departing 
from this continent, because we propose to reduce the duty from $17 
to $11. 
~The whole cost is put down at $31, the labor cost at $7.57; the 
tariff is $17. The manufacturer has $9.48 more for each ton that alliee 
the labor cost. The labor cost of this ton is exceptionally high. I 
have a statement of the labor cost of a ton of steel rails at Bethlehem, 
Pa., taken recently by Mr. Schoenhof, and it shows labor cost there 
$3.85 per ton. The labor cost of a ton of steel rails in England is not 
one dollar cheaper than here. Mr. Schoenhof informs me that a ton 
of bar-iron costs, for labor, in England about $7.75, and here about 
$8. But let us leave these and proceed with the official figures. A 
keg of steel nails costs $2.34; the labor cost is 67 cents, the tariff is 
$1.25. A ton of pipe-iron costs $34.57; labor cost, $12.26; the tariff 
is $22.40. Ss 

_ Here is a car-wheel weighing 500 pounds; cost $18; labor cost, 85 _ 
cents; tariff rate is 2} cents per pound, equivalent to $12.50, to cover — 
a labor cost of 85 cents! [Laughter.] Why, Mr. Chairman, these — 
laborers of ours ought to get immensely rich if they could get all 

that Congress votes to them, if the manufacturers did not stop the 
bounties intended by the Government to reach the pockets of the 
workingmen. ae 

Here is a coarse wool suit of clothes such as our working people _ 
wear in their daily toil in the shop and field. The whole cost is $12. 
The labor cost is $2. The tariff duty is 40 cents per pound and 35 per 
cent. ad valorem. As the weight of the suit is not given, we cannot 
get the exact tariff, but the duty on woolen clothes imported last 

~ year averaged 54 per cent., and.at that rate the tariff stands $6.48 to 
_cover $2 of labor cost. | 

A cotton suit costs $10.50; the labor cost is $1.65; the tariff is — 
$3.67. A dozen goblets cost 48 cents; labor cost, 15 Santos tariff, 19 
cents. White lead, by the hundredweight, g9, 50; lane cost, 50 
cents; tariff, $3. A hundredweight of mixed paints, $8: labor cost, . 
41 cents; tariff, $2. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, I have gone through with a number of — 
articles taken from these official reports made by the manufacturers 
themselves, and I have shown that the tariff was not framed for the 


a 


SE Reet at RIN peer eS ae Rt Re a 
aS tear, t Pp " rg Sie P : 
Toye \ diva fe * 


“ROGHR Q. MILLS. | 99 


benefit of the laborer, or that if it was so intended by those who 
framed it, the benefit never reaches the laborer, not a dollar of it. 


‘The working people are hired in the market at the lowest rates at 


which their services can be had, and all the ‘‘ boodle” that has been 
granted by these tariff bills goes into the pockets of the manufac- 
turers. It builds up palaces; it concentrates wealth; it makes great 
and powerful magnates; but it distributes none of its beneficence in 


- the homes of our laboring poor. 


_ It brings the tax-gatherer to them; it weighs them down as it 
goes; it compels them to pay out a large share of their daily earnings 
for the necessaries of life; and the money it raises by high prices on 


domestic manufactures it transfers not into the coffers of the Gov- 


ernment, but into the coffers of private individuals, It is making a 
wide distinction in this country between two classes—one numerous, 


. put poor; one small, but powerful and rich. It is a policy that is at 


war with the ieeivations of this country. The concentration of the 


S oalth of the country in the hands of a few will in progress of time 


overthrow the very foundations of our free government. 

‘Now, gentlemen, the time has come, after all these taxes on 
“‘realth have been swept away, after the people of this country have 
_been bearing for years these enormous burdens that have been levied 


_ on the necessaries of life; now, when “‘ trusts,” and ‘‘ combinations,” 
and ‘‘ pools” are arising all around us to limit production, to iriereage 
_ prices, to make the laborer’s lot harder and darker—now the time 


has come for us to do something, not for classes, but for the great 
~ masses of our people. 


T hope and trust that the bill which we have presented to you — 


and which has met with favor throughout the whole country will 


~ 
7 
a 


receive a majority of your votes, a majority of the votes of the 
Senate, and becomealaw. I earnestly hope when the Treasury is 
- full to overflowing of the people’s hard earnings, you will lighten 


_ their burden, and reduce the taxes on the necessaries of life. 


Although the bill we propose is not all that we could have asked, 
although it is a very moderate bill, yet it will send comfort and 
happiness into the homes and bosoms of the poor laboring people of 
‘this country, and I ask you now in behalf of them to consider their 
claims and help to reduce the burdens that have so long been laid 
upon their shoulders. 

[Enthusiastic applause on tne Democratic side, and cries of 
“Vote! yo ** Vote!” 


~ 


‘ROGER @ MILLS. 


DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BUREAU OF Lesoeee . 

Washington, D. C., April 16, 1888. _ 

Sir: I have the honor to forward herewith such statistics as I have been aS 

able to prepare, showing the cost of production of textiles at two different = =r : 

periods in several mills of the United States. RS 
Very respectfully, ae 

CARROLL D. WRIGHT, Commissioner. 


Hon. Roger Q. Mitts, M. C., 
House of Representatives. 


Values of the products of domestic manufactures, of domestic manufactures ae 
exported, of foreign manufactures imported, and of the total consumption — 
of domestic and foreign manufactures in 1850, 1860, 1870, and 1880, with — 
the proportions of domestic and foreign manufactures consumed in 1850, 
1860, 1870, and 1880. 


Values of — Consumption of— S 

Year Products of | Exports of Consumption =e 
a. f domestic Gomiestit Imports + | of domestic | Domestic | Imported 
: manu- manu: of manu- | and foreign | manu- manu- 
factures.* | factures.t | tactures.t Mpeior factures. | factures. 


ey ee ee ee 


PBbO es ce $1,019,106,616| $22,903,888 | $130,838,280 | $1,127,041,008 88.89 OL aaa 
A BOOS cect sot 1,885,861,676) 45,658,873 .| 261,264,310 2,101,467,1138 87.57 12.428 ay 
TA ee 4,232,3825,442| 47, 921. 154 808,363,496 4,492, 767,784 93.14 6.86 Kae 
ETS8003 .255 5,369,579,191 79, 510, 447 423,699,010 5,713,767, 754 92.58 it anes 
* Census years. t Years ending June 30. +t Gross imports, = oo 
WM. F. SWITZLER, Chief of Bureat. ) 
‘TREASURY DEPARTMENT, BUREAU OF STATISTICS, Ss. So pag! 
February 18, 1888. tae 


Values of the products of domestic manufactures and of the exports of domestic D, 
- manufactures, with the proportions of such manufactures retained for home 
consumption and exported, in 1850, 1860, 1870, and 1880. 


: tds Proportion of ‘ 
ere Hanes ee Domestic Manufactures— sx 


re Years. De 
<5 Products of Exports of Retained =. oe 
he domestic domestic for home Exported, 
- i manufacture.* manufacture.t | consumption. % 
Per cent, Per cent. — 
ABO isis siete xtaie's: leis $1,019 ,106,616 $22,903,888 97.75 2.20 aaa 
Ths leld eet aaa eae 1,885 ,861,676 45,658,873 97.58 2.42 
LOCOS SM he Nes 6 debs 4,232 .325,442 47,921,154 98.87 4.13 
pice Peo 5,369,579,191 79,510,447 98.52 1.48 _. 
Ee * Census years. + Years ending June 30. 


WM. F. SWITZLER, Chief of Bureau. 
TREASURY DEPARTMENT, BuREAU OF STATISTICS, Ro. 
February 18, 1888. 


‘qove zoy Avp aod spunog x 
Sean OT Cade PETE REA SE NS LRP RIN LOPE te none GONNA ED Com 


lg Spe seer eccssteosnce C6 Ce 6P'T 82603°T Sa ON 4g « GQUB ,, BIg ee eae u01T eee A077, MON 988T Ah 
OSS cor | 6F &9 OF &6 06°E ~ looTZ0'°o |"spunog | 6'9T |°** “TouuRTA |" UeTOOMA |" "*"SWesNYyoRsseA | LSS | 9 
com a § cpt | OF OFT 08 09 OST |S2897'0 | “SPAGA | 6S “SeISUUISSBD |" UeTooM |""""S#eSNYOeSsBHL | 988l | F 
0°82 GOL | 60P PSTT 092 F6E sot 610100 |" "SprvA | O'GOL | “UOT JuIAg |**°"U0}0H | “orTYSdUeH MON | 98BI | F 
0'r6T 4UT | 086 dSh 0S L6G 00 TF 69e10'O |" "SPIPA | O'GL | "SSaye0qyg |°** "M0930 |*** “SyesnYowssv[ | 98St | & 
Piet Se pce ont wees UEP 096 ost cO'T 6cOT0'O | "SPABA | OBOE | "UFOTO ULI j°°"* WOPOHD |°*” ‘sqgesnyowsseyy | P98 | 3 
T 


PELs 90°T$ | SFT gee | PF IST 00'TR = istoro0$|*"SPreA | B86 |UIOTO QUIIg |°*""m09J0H |°*-“S#JeSNYOVSSe | PS8T 


ee, a ae 
= "288. OL F88I-GOIved AGNOOUS AHL 
¥. 3 j s ‘ 
» aa See 00000 ee en ne 
es weccccccccfescevece | ernaces Cc) were reel reser ceces 080° T. 00Sz0'°S seeae uo, ae . Gque ,, 31g crease TTT, a ioaerae se IO Ke MON ‘O98L a 
Be 0°0g 2 06°0 | 06 8g o& 96 000'r |oooor’o |'spunog | O'OL |°***TouuR,, |“ ueTooM |*** SyesnyosseW | 8cst | 9 
g Sr | 060 | 0& c6 cy 0g 0S0°E j00004°0 | “SPAVA | GT "SOIOWISSBD |**'MOTOOM |**"“SJjoSNToRssey | Bost | G 
EAS c’PrT ¢9°0 | &8@ P9L OSs VIP 029'0 |92¢10'0 |""SpaeA | GVh | UIOTO JuLag |°***U0}40D | osrysdmeH ANON | Cost | F 
: cS 9°OeT 0470 | O8T 98P LI§ 69T 029°0 |Pe9T0'O |°‘SpravA | S'Ih | ‘Ssurjooyg |°**°09j0D |**"“SyJeSNTO"sSeW | SST | & 
oi8 eee ites sito hs | 086 Pct 94 os9°0—s {zFcTO'O |" ‘SsprVA | OVP |UQOTO yuIIg |°**° 109909 |***"S¥eSNovsseM | OLB | 6 
Sei g9°0$ | SF as 2g 8¢ 199°0$ |66rIo‘0$|"""SPABA | GF |"UIOTO GQUIAg |*""m09}00 |" -'’SHoSNGoUsSeIT | GPT | T 
[SRP RS ha ae) SNE EVR Ce a ee ee NEARER PER ayaa. cl ARCH PERE ie a eee a pe cae « 
Mi baba “19q ‘spuvy | ‘spuey| 4a o> + |‘oanseout} *4419 B 
: omer) feo x t : “18. 
bois oa ‘S038 M|_oin N T8IOL | goog keq é E z 4 F =f S jo 41uQ, -aend Teeds [e1909845 eg 
too. 9 : tae ; = 
=O 509 Ses 09819 IwIK| 2S x 
5 409 @ Ph ome) we 
“B1QAB0\\ ‘9uity [NJ 0} poonpar | PR% oe, B B Fel aae um ord paras 5 & 
sgAo[ dure Jo sequinN ae &. o' “to zed yonpoig qsnpuyl . =n : 4 
B rad ‘i bar} : é . a” “ 


/ a ‘098. OL 6rst—Goludd ISUIT CHL 
-“sponuod on ID saqnig pang es Ur Pigs binned af 00) 


Ne Ee ’ t 


"Teo ee. as - ane. Ee om es Coed) Pa i ee ae ee 4. 


9°Or 
0°66 
€&8 
oe 
AST 
b Se 


0° ee 
“Quad Ka 


ROGER Q. MILLS. 


‘eINS¥OTI JO 
qiun 
aed 4809 
IOQG¥I 
JO Osve.ioed 


32 


8° 9 ScPITE Tt 
T'6S OTT6S0°0 
8 OF QSI8cE "0 
cca § 7 ¥02900 0 
g°9S 47600 °0 
& TF 62£900°0 
€ cP %62900°0$ 
‘ported 4s.ay 
JO 4S00 ‘aINSBOUT JO 
IOQVI JO SOO q1an 10d 
10qe[ qons 4soo 10qv'T 
JO ‘quedo 19g 
—oeq pinom 


SUIMOT[OT 9} *puodses 
JO yonpoid 04 e[qvordde 


e19M pue puodes Ur pelIeaoimd 


polled 4siy Jo sosva jy 


Se 


0°88 gaa! 
0°06 0°69 
6°&P § "SIT 
4°98 € OPT 
& 6P O° LL 
g'T9 8°GrT 
ie Gees 
‘sodem ‘gonpoid 


Ur OSBOIOUT 


UI OSBEIOUT 


wabwesece sees “o* "MIO XK MON 
ee ee “SHIOSNTOBSSCAL 


teeeesseees gna ggnTOUSSBAL 


ellysduvey MON 
weer ece reece "SIIOSNYOVSSB IE 
oveccescece “‘SiJOSNoVsseyy 


Ceseneececs ‘SOS OVsseyy 


“OTIS 


"7800 LoQn) 0} yo0dsas YR paLoprswoa sporsod om) YT, 


Ra ae ar 
ero eee eee 
ae Geno ae 
Sere 
Gar oh gears 
Sci ea are 


‘SpoLlog 


mM RR 6 UD OO OR 


“que 
-4St{qe3s82 
JO “ON 


LC SE ED - 


' HON. THOMAS B. REED, 


OF MAINE. 
(Republican Side.) 


: I purpose to discuss to-day some of the general principles which, 
in my opinion, underlie the two modes of national action which 
are confessedly in dispute in Congress and in the country. I shall 

treat the bill before us as in their hearts the leaders on the 
_ other side treat it, as a step only in a particular direction. The 
_ whole course of the debate has gone that way, and it is a just and 
_— proper way. 

; How important the propositions at issue are the intense interest 
_ already excited by the pending measures on two continents bears 
the strongest witness that can be borne by men. Those who, living 
_ on this side of the ocean, grow and make articles which are neces- 
_ sary for the comfort and happiness of the people of the United 
_ States are on one side of the question, while the foreign manufac- 

turers, foreign political economists, and foreign statesmen are all 
4 on the other. 
4 This, however, should not prejudice the question. If it be true 
_ that by having their goods manufactured abroad the people of the 
_ United States as a whole would become richer and more prosperous, 
_ would have their houses better furnished, their tables spread with 
i finer linen, and covered with more healthful food; if their bodies 
_ would be protected by warmer woolens from the cold of Maine and 

Y by finer clothing from the burning sun of Texas; if they would on 
- the whole, and from generation to generation, enjoy more of the 
comforts and luxuries of life, and would themselves be more in- 
aS telligent, more independent, and better fitted to be the citizens of 
_ a Republic already great and destined to be mighty beyond all 
- former dreams of empire, then by all means let us sink national 
prejudice, burst the barriers of provincial narrowness, and with 
2 mere accord adopt not merely the present bill, but such legislation 
33 


si a 


{+ 


34 | THOMAS B. RHED. 


as will surely treble the spindles of Europe and destroy our own— 3 
such measures as will put out our furnaces and illumine those 


beyond the sea. 
Let us vote for such laws as will make our mines mere holes in 


iy 


the ground, and stand aside to behold the glory alike of free raw 
materials and cheap goods purchased in the cheapest markets. Let — 
the tall chimneys no longer disfigure our beautiful skies, and the — 


rushing streams flow to the sea unvexed by mill-wheels, their 


murmurs undisturbed by the clash of the shuttles and the click — 


of the looms. 
If of every two dollars in our pockets, the one alone is sufficient, 


if spent in England, to give us all we have now, and we are gure ~ 


of still having in our pockets the same two dollars which we now 


have, surely the problem is too easy for dispute, too simple for — 
discussion. We have only to pass a bill which gives free course to ~ 
what the free-trade professors, with glib secularization of the Deity, _ 


call the international law of the Almighty; and if the learned econo- 


mists on the other side are true to their logic, and do not palter — : 
with both their language and their convictions, they can propose — 


no other course. 


Napoleon was right when he said that Europe must be Cossack = 
or republican; Lincoln was right when he said the United States — 
must be either free or slave. The house divided against itself has — 


to unite or fall. The revenue-reform argument is either a false 


pretense or covers the whole ground. Protection is either in its — 


essence a benefit or a curse. You cannot dilute a curse and make 
it a blessing. Ratsbane and water are no more food than ratsbane — 
pure. [Laughter.] Incidental protection is a sham. Tariff for 
revenue only goes down before the same arguments which are 


used against protection. 


If protection be a tax for manufacturers’ benefit, then it ig the ae 
same tax if it be the result of even a revenue tariff. Incidental eS 
protection is of all the most inexcusable. It is an accident which 


ought to be avoided like a railway disaster. If when you take one — 


dollar from the citizen for the Treasury and four for the manu- — 


facturer, is it any the less robbery that you call it a revenue tariff? — 


™ 


If you gentlemen on the other side believe what you say, you 


ought to be as furious against the rapine and plunder of the Mills & 


bill as you profess to be against those of the present law. 
The President is the leader of the Democracy. He is also the 


dispenser of patronage, and as he is rapidly shaking the dust of ho 


= 


- 
e 
4. 


civil-service reform off his feet [laughter], he is assuming control — es 


over his party. One paragraph in his ea ec covers the esi 


<< 


as 


THOMAS B. REED, 3D 
ground of protectiun and uree tradw, and points out the plain-duty 
_ of the Democracy. 
There is but one free trade, and the President is its prophet. 
Whoever falls in battle in the service of this new Allah and 
its prophet, for him shall open the shining gates of the heaven of 
foreign missions and Federal offices. [Laughter.] Therefore, with 
confidence I quote to the true believers the inspired wisdom of the 
message. It is an old quotation much wondered at. The mere 
- wisdom of this world has refuted it many times and oft. But it 
is of the essence of the doctrines which oppose protection. It is 
the warp and woof of the whole discussion, which must be my 
excuse for again inflicting it on a weary world. ‘These laws,” 
he says, and he is speaking of tariff laws—‘‘These laws raise the 
price to consumers of all articles imported and subject to duty by 
precisely the sum paid for such duties.” ‘‘ Precisely” is the word 
he uses, and it is a word of tremendous significance. But the 
- corollary which he draws from the whole sentence is of still more 
tremendous significance. If the consumer pays ‘‘precisely” the 
4 - duty in excess of the price of the imported article, then the President 
— tis also right when 2 says that on all domestic protected articles 
va the consumer pays ‘‘nearly or quite the same enhanced price.” 
fe That is the whole counsel of the Lord on the subject. Whether 
“the protection be incidental or accidental, the result of war tariff 
or peace tariff, the consumer not only pays the duty on imported 
~ articles to the Government, but also on all domestic productions 
its equivalent to the greedy manufacturer. ; 
At last, then, we have a mathematical basis on which to calculate ~ 
es _ the damage inflicted on this country by the system established by 
' the men who framed the Constitution. By tariff taxes, whcther 
_ great or small, whereby manufactures are encouraged, every dollar 
raised by the Government takes out of the pockets of the people 
other dollars and puts them into the pockets of capitalists. All these 
dollars are not merely changed from the pockets of the poor to the 
' pockets of the rich—their value is lost to the nation; for by just so 
~ much has the nation’s labor been unprofitably expended and wasted. 
a Since, then, we pay to protected industries the equivalent of the 
_ duty which is imposed on imported articles, we have only to calcu- 
3 : late the amount of this payment thus lost to the country to find just 
- what we have been doing and just where we are. Our manufactured 
products in 1880 were $5,370,000,000. If you add less than one-third 
_ for increase you will have for the year 1887 the figures given by the 
‘ a report of the Committee on Ways and Means, $7,000,000,000. If you 
take only one-half of this sum as being sities protection; and calcu- 


Nee a aire ar yal taay ctl Saha RAMEN Ga) he 
Meet bed ch Ot aac dt bs 


86. ‘PHOMAS Bek REED 


late the duty, you will find that the sum uselessly paid is more than — 


one thousand millions of dollars. 


Since 1880 more than six thousand six hundred millions of dollars — 


have been wrested from the people, and six thousand six hundred 
millions would have bought every acre of farming land in the United 
States at the outbreak of the war. If you carry back the baleful 
calculation to the day when. we Republicans took charge of the 


country, you will find, if the President be right, that we have 
thrown away the whole value of the land we lived in, and instead of 


turning over to civil-service reform a country worth $44,000,000, 000, 
we turned over a rack-rented farm mortgaged far beyond its value. 
There are other remarkable figures to be deduced from that para- 
graph in the message; figures which must light up the pathway of 
Democratic duty with the electric light of conscience. [Laughter.] 
In 1887 forty millions of woolen goods were imported, paying 
twenty-seven millions of duties, 40 per cent. on cost and duties. 


This went to the Government. Three hundred and fifty-six millions ; 


of domestic woolen manufactures were bought that same year by 
the impoverished American people. Under the radiant light of the 


message it will be seen that one hundred and forty-two millions of _ 


that money went into the gaping pockets of manufacturers and 
were lost forever to the down-trodden people. [Laughter and 
applause. | 

We imported thirty-one millions’ worth of silk; we manufactured 


forty-six millions, of which sixteen and one-half millions lined the 


purses of the plunderers. The same story can be told of every pro- 
tected industry, until the total of more than one thousand millions 
of the people’s money rolls into the pockets of these licensed robbers _ 
of the poor. If this messago from our ruler be true, every factory 


is the abode of a robber baron, more fell and sure than ever swooped 


down a European hill-side to harry a cavalcade of honest merchants. _ 


In every mine mouth lurks a more dreadful giant than ever ~ 
before smelled the blood of an Englishman. [Renewed laughter.] 
But what do the friends of virtue propose to do with these wicked 


people? Sweep them out of existence with the strong hand of jus- 
tice? Does the gentleman from Texas intend to lasso these creat- 
ures and tangle them in the folds of his lariat? Does the gentleman 


from Arkansas mean that from their dead bodies the handle of his 


bowie-knife shall protrude ? Ah, no! they are still to live and still — 


to flourish. They will have only the delightful punishment of being 


turned over to the melting eloquence, the soothing rhetoric, of the — 
gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Breckinridge] while he explains his — 
theory of fair plunder, of honest and decent robbery, with no restric- ey. 


= YS BS nt cide dig i 3 Seis icity ae “oe oe Ne Pe 8 ee 


ed 


THOMAS B. REED. 37 


___ tions save such as will be satisfactory to those good manufacturers 
- who have been admitted to private interviews by the back-stairs. 


3 [Laughter and applause. ] 

; The castles of these marauders are still to smoke upon the hill- 
: tops, and the tall chimneys are still to break the sky-line of this. 
unhappy country. They are to be allowed to rob within 7 per cent. 
of what they rob now, and as compensation they are to be let loose 
. upon the markets of the world, where, according to the learned 
_ chairman, they are to reap larger wealth and pile up statelier mil- 
lions. Do you think that the calculations I have made are but 
4 - ridiculous imaginings of a scoffer; are but toying with the deep 
-__ seriousness of the Presidential mind? Nay, not so. The belief that 
what I have figured out is absoiute truth pervades the Democratic 


mind from one extremity to the other; from the very head to the 
very tail. [Renewed laughter and applause.] _ 
The Hon. John Randolph Tucker, then a member from Virginia, 
as delightful in private life as he was able in the service of his coun- 
_ ty, in the year of our Lord 1882, in a speech delivered May 5, on 
the twenty-fifth page of the same, made the annual sum thus plun- 
- dered from the people eight hundred millions for the year 1880. 
_ That speech was the most frank and honest grappling with the ques- 
- tion I have seen, except perhaps the speech of the gentleman from 
- South Carolina [Mr. Hemphill]. In the same year, on the 20th day 
_ of April, in a speech delivered that day, on page 6 thereof, the chair- 
man of the Committee on Military Affairs, the member from Illinois, 
_ proclaimed the astounding fact that during the last nineteen years. 
Be these ungodly manufacturers had swindled the people out of 
BS -$15,000,000,000. Let me be exact, for the calculation is specific and 
ua precise. The exact sum was $15,.063,745,645. [Laughter.] I do not 
need to cite the learned occupant of the chair [Mr. Springer], or the 
e gentleman from New York [Mr. Cox], or even that individual who 
from the Speaker’s bench in the gallery overlooked the opening of 
the debate on the bill which it is insinuated he did not frame. He 
_ made it a thousand millions a year six years ago. 
BY, Great heavens! These amazing plunderers had in their pockets 
_ fifteen thousand millions in 1882; have had eight hundred millions 
a year since—in all, nineteen thousand eight hundred millions, or 
three thousand millions more than this whole country is listed for 
taxation, and the Mills bill, the representative of the concentrated 
- and concatenated wisdom of the Democracy, proposes to give them 
more. [Applause and laughter.] Gentlemen of the other side, 
- heroes of the new crusade for revenue reform and civil-service 


h LM a a NTs en eae 
i gb Bet 2 Rear sk tia =f Merce Ba haa oa 
sara 0 Wee ahi Sty tas det rk 


38 THOMAS B. REED. 


reform, if you believe what you say, is it not ample time that this 
tribute cease? What excuse have you for continuing it? 
If the President be right, and you don’t dare to doubt him, an 


annual tribute is paid protected manufacturers out of the pockets of 


the people more impoverishing than ever was exacted by an Oriental 
despot. In the face of your plain duty to free the people from this 
iron yoke you stand higgling about the amount of the tribute. 
Instead of $47 for every hundred you purpose to give $40 of the 
people’s money and throw into the trade the markets of the world! 
If it be a tribute, be bold and sweep it away. Why do you hesi- 
tate? Is it because you dare not be caught lowering the wages of 
the laboring men who have votes? Have the courage of your lead- 


ers’ convictions—for has not the gentleman from Texas, godfather © 


of this bill, who has promised to bring it up in the nurture and 
admonition of the Lord, loudly proclaimed to the open day that 


tariffs have nothing to do with wages? Is it owt of mercy to la 


capitalist that you falter? [Laughter.] 
Do you say there is capital invested under our laws, and we must. 
keep faith with those who have invested it? Whether faith should 


be kept with such vampires is for you to say. But surely no better 


faith need be kept than to pay back every cent they have invested. — : 
If the President be right, if John Randolph Tucker be right, if the _ 


honorable and gallant member be right; if J. 8. Moore, who fixes the 


tribute in 1882 at one thousand millions, more than any of us, be 
right—if they all be right, then every year more than one thousand - : 


millions come out of the people for these men. 
What is their whole stock in trade? What is the tale of every 


dollar they have as capital invested? If you take one-half the in- if 
dustries as protected, and we have made our other calculations on — : 
that basis, the whole capital is only one billion eight hundred and _ 


- gixty million dollars. Now we have shown, according to our chief. 
ruler, that the plunder of these manufactur ers is $1,000,000,000. 
Therefore, in one year and four-fifths of a year, every dollar of pe 
capital asia be repaid, provided they kept their mill-wheels 


A 
“a 
bse 
By: 


unturned, and the people of the United States, protected against 


protection, could be as free and as happy asif the egis of the Con- 


Se 
nal r 


federate constitution, article 1, section 8, were spread all over the ie 


land. [Jeers on the Damocrahe side. | 


that strikes their eyes, every sound that resounds in their ears, shows _ 
the folly of their theories, the absurdity of their logic. What use 


is i to tell the people of this empire that they have been robbed and Z 


i 
Why do men with such beliefs so plain, and so distinct, hesitates a 
to do their duty? It is because every wind that blows, every sight < 


me 


* : 


F 


& 
i 


DE er ee See MS as ree ee MM 


THOMAS B. REED. "8g 


: plundered one thousand millions of dollars every year, during the 
_ very time when over 3,500 miles of distance cities have been spring- 


ing up like magic, richer in a decade than the old-world cities have 
grown in centuries; when 120,000 miles of railroad have been built, 
which compress the broad expanse of a continent into a week of 
time; when the commerce of its inland lakes has grown to rival the 


— commerce between the two worlds; when from every land under 
_ the sun the emigrants have been flocking to its happy shores, drawn 
_ there by the peace and prosperity which shine on all its borders and 


sweep from circumference to center. There are no eyes so dull that 
cannot see the ever-rising glories of this Republic except those 


which are bandaged by the prejudices of long ago. [Applause on 


Republican side. ] 
Thus far I have employed a familiar method of argumentation 


¢ which is called in Latin reductio ad absurdum, or, in plain English, 
confronting the principles a man lays down with the facts of the 


ee 


tidy Mee ema 
ee dee 


universe and showing him the dreadful absurdity of which he has 
been guilty. ([Laughter.] The principles are the President’s, the 
facts are from his own familiar friends. Which do you believe? 


The two sentences of the message which I have quoted are the 
; _ essence of free trade. Whoever believes them has but one honest — 


course to pursue. He must demand direct taxation. There is no 
el from it. [Applause. ] 

~ ~Now let us turn to the other side. The system we believe in is 
tied protection, and is founded upon the doctrine that a great 


‘nation like ours, having all varieties of climate and soil, will be 
- richer, more independent, and more thrifty, and that its people will 
be better fitted to enjoy the comforts and luxuries of peace, and 
better situated to endure the calamities of war, if its own people 
. supply its own wants. 
I do not purpose to defend protection. Its vast growth within . 
the last quarter of a century defends it better even than eloquent 


orations. It was born with the Republic. It is the faith and prac- 


tice of every civilized nation under the sun save one. It has sur- 
vived the assaults of all the professors of the ‘‘dismal science” 
 ealled political economy. It has stood up against all the half know]- 


edge of learned men who never had sense enough to transmute their 


learning into wisdom. [Great applause. ] 
_. Ox the face of the earth to-day there are but two sets of people 


who believe in free trade, whether pure and simple or disguised as 


- revenue reform, and those two are the masked majority of the 
- Committee on Ways and Means and their followers and the United 
_ Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, with Ireland suppressed, 


> 


™ 


> ee te y aes aha a we & R Ser es es ity t akc 5s ge Onn ea eas 


40 Ke THUMAS B. REED. 


Russia, the granary of Europe, has abandoned free trade, with 
the striking result that whereas, in 1876, before the duties were 
raised, she bought eight million hundredweight of British metals 
and paid therefor thirty million of dollars (eight for thirty), she 
zot the same quantity in 1884 and paid only seventeen million for 
it (eight for seventeen). Three dollars and seventy-five cents per 
bhundredweight before tariff, and $2.124 after. Austria, Germany. 


Italy, Mexico, and the Dominion of Canada, that child of Britain ~ 


herself, have all joined the army of protection. It is the instinct of 


NGinaity against the assumptions of the book men. It is the wis- 


dom of the race against the wisdom of the few. —— 


Perhaps the best argument I can make for protection is to state 


what it is and the principles on which it is founded. 
Man derives his greatest power from his association with other 
men, his union with his fellows. Whoever considers the human 


being as a creature alone, by himself, isolated and separated, and — 


tries to comprehend mankind by mathematically adding these — 


atoms together, has utterly failed to comprehend the human race 
and its tremendous mission. 
Sixty millions even of such creatures without association are 


only so many beasts that perish. But sixty millions of men welded — « 
together by national brotherhood, each supporting, sustaining, and 


buttressing the other, are the sure conquerors of all those mighty 
powers of nature which alone constitute the wealth of this world. 


[Applause.] The great blunder of the Herr Professor of political — 
economy is that he treats human beings as if every man were so ~ 
many foot-pounds, such and such a fraction of a horse-power. All 


the soul of man he leaves out. 

Think for a moment of the foundation prinianiee involved in this 
question, which I now ask, Where does wealth come from? It 
comes from the power of man to let loose and yet guide those ele- 
mental forces the energy of which is infinite. It comes from the 


power of man to force the earth to give her increase to hold in the © 


bellying sail the passing breeze, to harness the tumbling waterfall, 


to dam up the great rivers, to put bits in the teeth of the lightning. 
Foot-pounds and fractions of a horse-power will never do this, It — 
takes brains and the union of foot-pounds and fractions of a horse- — 


power working harmoniously together. 


To grasp the full powers of nature, to reap the richest wealth of ~ 
the world, we must utilize the full power of man, not merely mus- 
cles and brains, but those intangible qualities which we call energy, 
vigor, ambition, confidence, and courage. Have you never re- 
marked the wonderful difference between a sleepy country village, 


oh eae YL Dre en che” 5 ae ee Pe ee 


= Wit? ay 


THOMAS B. REED. | 41 


lying lazily alongside un unused waterfall, where more than half 
the energy of the people was lost for lack of the kind of work they 
wanted to do; where, whenever three men met together in the 
road, the rest looked out of the windows, idly wondering what the 
riot was about [laughter], and that same village after the banks 
were lined with workshops and the air was noisy with the whirr of 


_ the spindles, and every man was so eager to work that there never 


seemed hours enough in the day to tear from the powers of nature 
their imprisoned richness ? 

If you have, you have also seen the contrast between men left to 
themselves, so many foot-pounds and fractions of a horse-power, 
and men incited by hope, spurred on by ambition, and lighted on 
their way by the confidence of succes. [Applause.] 

For a nation to get out of itself or out of the earth all the wealth 
there is in both, it is not necessary for the nation to buy cheap or 
sell dear. That concerns individuals alone. What concerns the 
nation is how to utilize all the work there is in men, both of 
muscle and brain, of body and of soul, in the great enterprise of 


setting in motion the ever-gratuitous forces of nature. 
How shall you get out of the people of a nation their full powers? — 
Right here is precisely the dividing line. The let-alone school say, 


leave individual man to his own devices. The protectionist school 
say, let us stimulate combined and aggregated man to united en- 


-deavor. What made men work before governments? Was it an 
intellectual belief that work was good for the muscles? Not the 


ae least in the world. It was hunger and desire. Hunger has ceased 


to play the greater part, but desire will never pass away. 


In the ever-growing desire of mankind for new worlds of com- 3 
fort and luxury to-conquer is the blazing promise of the unhasting, 


e unresting march of civilization. In that column of march the 


whole nation must be ranged. Association is the instinct of hu- 


manity which grows with its growth. First the family, then the 
tribe, and then the nation. The race will come by and by. Faith- 


_ fulness to each in their order is the true route to the next. 


Here in the United States are 60,000,000 people with all the 
varied characters their numbers indicate. Some have faculties fit 
for farming, some for the management of machinery, some for 
invention. The problem before you is what system will get from 


all these creatures, so different from each other, the maximum of © 


work and wealth and wisdom. [Applause.] 
I have already said that the great incentive, the motive power 
of man, is desire. That is the magnet which draws him, but, like 


: all other magnets, it must be put near the armature. The quench 


Vie: ee Mee Sy es te! RES be a rae tl ae yee ae ee 
haat! oc ye i i 


oie Uae taae THOMAS B. REED. 


ing of desire must not cost too much. The pathway to its ac-. 

- complishment must not be too rugged. If you say to him who 
loves invention and hates farming, your path and your desife lies 
through the cultivation of the fields, he will say this thing costs 
too much. If you say to ‘the man who loves the fields, your way 
must be through the workshop, you bar his progress. 

There is only one way to get the best work out of men, and that 
is to give each the work he can do best. You can only accomplish 
this by diversifying industry. To diversify industry completely 
in a country such as ours, there is but one way given under heaven 
among men. Toenable the American people themselves to supply 
all their wants, you must give and assure to the American people 
the American markets. What does this phrase mean in practical 
life? It means that we, the nation, say to capital, ‘‘ Embark your- 
self in the manufacture of such and such articles, and you shall — 
have a market to the extent of the wants of the American people.” 

Capital then says to labor, ‘‘Go with me into this new field, all 
of you who like this work best, and we will share the results.” ~ 
Then begins a new industry. Multiply this by hundreds and you 
_ have a community where every man honestly minded will get what 
on the whole suits him best, and the nation will get the greatest 
amount of work from the greatest number. 

To this system, so far sketched, no human being can find 
reasonable objections. But it is averred that there are some draw- 
backs. It is alleged that the people who are in the older industries 
—those which establish themselves without law—have to pay 
higher prices for the articles so manufactured, and that the employ- 
ment in new industries is all at their expense. This does not in the 
least touch upon the utilization. of human energy and natural 
energy which would otherwise run to waste. It does not- touch 
upon the question of the divine right of those who are adapted to © 

\ the older industries to reap alone the riches of the earth. — 

“~~ So seemingly unjust has this last appeared in one instance, that 
of the land-owner, that a prominent free-trader, Mr. Henry George, 
who will vote next election for revenue reform, has proposed to 
take away from land more or less of its value to the owner. That 
I do not agree to. I make no reclamations on that account. ae 
_ I meet the question squarely and asseverate that protection does  _— 
not raise prices. The opposite statement and the argument which 
backs it up I purpose to state fairly, for we now come to the famous 
revenue-reform dilemma. You tell us, they say, that protection is 
for the purpose of enhancing prices to enable high wages to be paid, 
and yet you say that protection lowers prices. This is flat contra- 


Tee ee ; ‘ 
o i at . = - z “ 


~ THOMAS B. REED. : 43 


rs 
“4 


_ diction. So itis as you state it. But your statement, like all reve- 
- nue-reform statements, flourishes only by assumption. 

F In order to make yourself clear, you have utterly omitted the 
element of time. You assume that we say that both our statements 
a of higher prices for higher wages and lower prices for consumers are 
- for the same instant of time. Not so. When you begin there are 
higher prices for higher wages, but when you establish your manu- 
factories, at once the universal law of competition begins to work. 
_ The manufactories abroad, urged upon by the lower prices which 

the tariff forces them to offer in order to compete with us, cause 
_ every element of economy in manufacture to be set in motion, 
_ Every intellect is put to work to devise new machinery which will 
_ produce at lower cost, to seek out new methods of utilizing waste, to 
- consolidation of effort to lessen general expenses, and the thousand 
*. and one devices every year invented to get more work out of the. 
_- powers of nature. 
_ At home the same causes are at work, and with rodoubted 
- energy, because on account of higher wages there are greater induce- 
, ments to substitute labor-saving devices for costly labor. And this 
‘colossal struggle between two great empires of industry, the foreign 
< -and the domestic, results everywhere in the cheapness of commodi- 
ties, in which progress of cheapness the world has marched on in 
i one unbroken undeviating line, until to-day the citizens of the 
- United States, the sovereigns of to- day, as we call them in moments 
2 of patriotic exaltation, the poorest citizens have for the commonest — 
a necessities of life the luxuries of the sovereigns of old days, [Ap- 
‘ 


week 


_ plause on the Republican side. ] 
That lower prices will come at once we have never said. That 
_ they will come and grow lower and lower so that in the series of 
years which make up a man’s life all he needs will cost him less than 
under revenue reform we asseverate and maintain, and all history is 
a behind our asseverations. 
eo | But would not all this take place under free trade; would not 
= ‘English manufactures, supplying all the world, have grown thus 
cheaper by themselves? Let me answer this question by two others. 
s Do you believe in the lowering of prices by competition? Of course 
— youdo. Do you believe that the great production of $7,000,000,000 
3 of manufactures have not entered into competition with those of 
e England? You know that they have been the great power which | 
has forced English prices down. 
Do you want an example of to-day? In 1883 the importers were 
eager to prevent the increase of the tariff on pottery. I know it, 
because a gentleman was here earnestly urging me not to consent to 


Sg co ene Bosc i i, eile Ais eae AN aaa i saat ee ey ee ge Se 


ea aku AN aban ae a La li 


44 THOMAS B. REED, 


the increase. Only three years afterwards he acknowledged to me 
that the foreign manufacturers were obliged, in the face of the great 
increase of product, both in quantity and quality, to cut their prices 
so as to pay even more than the tariff tax. Perhaps some revenue 
reformer may ask me, on the strength of this example, how our rais- 


ing tariff helped manufacturers here if the foreign manufacturer 


lowered his prices. 

Iam glad to answer that question, for it answers many others. 
Before the raise we were on pottery fighting foreigners gorged with 
profits and flushed with the spoils of our markets. To-day we are 
fighting them on even terms, or would have been but for the pack- 
age clause. Their profits would be going into our treasury, not into 
their pockets, and between them and us would still be going on that 
equal contest for cheaper and cheaper manufactures which, without 
lowering wages, is giving us every day lower prices and an ever- — 
widening manufacture. 

Perhaps some gentleman will say to me that this is alla dream; 
that the very fact of a barrier raised by our tariff prevents competi- 
tion. Every manufacturer knows better. England must work or 
starve. She has piled up her capital, and if she cannot get large - 
profits she will take small. Let me not confine myself to theory. 
Let me once more recall that tremendous fact about Russia. In 1876, 
three years before her tariff, she bought 8,000,000 hundredweight 
of British metals at $30,000,000, 8 for 30. In 1883, four years after 
the tariff, she bought the same amount, 8,000,000 hundredweight 
for $17,000,000, 8 for 17—$3,75 per hundred weight before, $2.12 after. 
Was that the effect of the Russian tariff alone? Not so. It was the 
effect of tariffs the world over. 

Let me show the same fundamental fact on a larger scale. I 
have here the report of the royal commission to inquire into the — 


causes of the depression of British trade. There is much matter 


of excellent admission throughout that work, but one paragraph will 


serve my present purpose. It is on the page numbered xii, where 


you will fine that the exports in 1883 were £240,000,000, but that the | 
value of those same exports at the prices of ten years before were 
£349, 000,000. | 
The difference is £109,000,000—$545,000,000. If you want it in 
percentage, you will find that you must add more than 45 per cent. 
to the price of 1883 to get the richly profitable prices of 1873. To 
what does the world owe this gain of $545,000,000 in a single year : 
Who was the fruitful mother of all this gain? ae 
She whom in your short-sighted wisdom you have alwaae called 
barren, tariff taxes [applause]; and facing your most eet ne 


ls 


aie i 220 eee 2 ages ee Ry Pe A year DP ee nt Pay DR TA hcl ae te eh at Le aS i ea Ms 
pay Sf , > , a tap rar os ‘ y i 
pe . 
- 


tn, 


THOMAS B. REED. 45 


phrase, the one you roll most lovingly under your tongue, I dare to 

asseverate that if the whole world will repeal its tariff taxes England 

will reap in the next ten years not only ten times these five hundred 

and forty-five millions, but a thousand millions more every year. 

Tariff taxes! How men like to fool themselves with phrases! Be- 

cause the taxing power is used not only for revenue but as the bar- 

rier, and taxes are odious, therefore the barrier must be odious also. 

How can taxes produce? This is only mere trifling. Can you keep 

cattle out of the cornfield by sticking wood into the ground? Yes, if 
you make a fence. 

Do you mean to tell me, said the wise bumpkin to the engineer 
on the banks of the Merrimac—do you mean to tell me that you can 
make that stream useful by putting rocks into it? Yes, said the en- 
gineer, as he proceeded to build his dam and set in motion the water- 


wheels of mighty Lowell. 


I have said that the professor of political economy treats man as 
a soulless aggregation of foot-pounds. Let me give youa ne 
example of this humanizing science. 

The British commission report, from which I have quoted, says, 
page xxi, paragraph 82, speaking of shorter hours of labor : 


~ It must be? for the country and the workman himself to decide whether 
the advantages of shorter hours compensate for the increased cost of pro- 


duction or diminished output. We believe that they do, and on social as 


well as on economical grounds we should regret to see any curtailment of 


the leisure and freedom which the workman now enjoys. No advantage 
which could be expected to accrue to the commerce of the country would, in 
our opinion, compensate for such a change. 


On the commission was Bonamy Price, the only recognized pro- 


_ fessor on it, and here is his sole contribution to this volume : 


I beg to express my dissent from paragraph 82. It contains a specified 
repudiation of the great doctrine of free trade. [Great is Diana of the Ephe- 
sians.| Shorter hours of labor do not and can not compensate to a nation 
for iacreased cost of production or diminished output. They tax the com- 
munity with dearer goods in order to confer special advantages on the 
working man. They protect him, and that is a direct repudiation of free 
trade. The country is sentenced to dearer and fewer goods. 

Bonamy PRICE. 


He is right, the dear professor, though rather crisp and brutal. 
Shorter hours and higher wages are ‘‘direct repudiations of free 


trade.” [Laughter and applause. ] 


Let me now tweat you to an argument for Bana in America | 


Tt get a ae ee ee “4 
7 +s 7 


Pag THOMAS B. REED. 


out of Bastiat. Frederic Bastiat, of France, was the brightest free- ie 


trader that ever charged down the lines. No man can refuse the 
tribute of admiration to the wonderful play of that subtle intel- 
lect. He has furnished the other side most of its brains and all its 


~~ dialectics. 
Yet while he is arguing free trade for France, I think he has ~~ 


proved protection for America. Talking to Frenchmen, he says: 


“Tsay, and I think so very sincerely, that if two countries find — 
themselves placed in unequal conditions of production, tt is that one ~ 


_ which is the least favored of nature which has the most to gain by 
liberty of exchanges.” 
He proves his case this way. Labor is the sole cost. AJI the rest 


is’ the gratuity of nature. Whatever labor produces in one land 


more than the same labor in another land is difference of gratuity 
only. It is the measure of relative richness of the two countries. 
If one man should discover rich soil he would alone reap the gra- 
 tuity. If ten thousand men discover it the principle of compe- 


tition comes in and the gratuity goes to consumers. If one farm 


- could: double its fertility, the owner would be richer. If all the 


_ farms doubled their fertility, the whole gratuity would go over to 


the consumers. Let me illustrate that by something which Bastiat 
never knew, for he died forty years ago. 

If one railroad alone in this country had had steel rails, all the 
benefit of that would have gone to the company. But when all the 
companies had them, and thereby could do their work cheaper and 
so save vast amounts of money, some railroad presidents looked for 


big dividends... ‘What happened? Why, each one said, I can get a — 


little more business if I do it cheaper, and get the same results. 
Then they began to compete, and the final result nowis that that 
magnificent gift of nature through Sir Henry Bessemer, the differ- 


ence between strong, long-lived steel rail, and the weak, short-lived — ; 2 


iron rail, has, every dollar of it, gone to the people, making cheap 
transportation instead of big dividends. [Applause.] 
Let my poor scared friend who covers his head with the bed- 


_ clothes at night lest he should be devoured by monopolies take cour- 
‘age. The Great Maker of this universe knows how to get His gifts 


distributed to His children. Since, then, the gratuitous part must 
be distributed, it follows, as Bastiat claims, that exchange is the 
barter of values, and value being reduced by competition to represent 


os work, exchange is the barter of equal works, and, therefore, in free — 
_ trade the richest country gives the most; in fact, it levels itself cae 


and levels the other countries up. 


Now, which is the richest, Europe or America? We are all rs a 


-THOMAS-B. REED. EOS AR 


agreed on that. We say America because our eyes behold it. You 

say so because your eyes behold it, and you see one thousand mil- 
_ lions wasted besides. What do you mean to do? I will tell you 

what we mean todo. Wemean to keep this wealth here. Wemean 
_ todo it-even if we build a ‘‘ Chinese” wall of tariff taxes around this — 
-eountry. [Applause. ] 7 
Let me give this great truth of Bastiat’s another application. 
_ Nature produces all. That is the origin of the much-abused phrase, 
‘‘ The farmer pays all.” Whenever the farmer goes beyond his farm 
for the gratification of his desires, Bastiat, the free-trader, shows that 
he must then share his riches. Now whom shall he share it with, 
_ the mechanic at home or the mechanic abroad; his fellow-citizen or 
~ analien? Which is for his interest ? 

Let me put it in other phrase. Which is it better fora fannie 
to do, send his surplus wheat a thousand miles to the sea-coast, three _ 
thousand miles across the water, pay the freight, sell it to the me- 
__. chanic who gets less wages, or sell it right here at home to the me- _ 
& chanic who gets more wages? The answer seems obvious. 
: The minor arguments for free trade are exceedingly simple. 
a \ Reasoning in a-circle alwaysis. There is nothing so compact as 
begging the question. ‘Truth is difficult. ‘‘Easy as lying” is a 
oe proverb. Says a learned ,professor, ‘‘If under your tariff I can buy 
_ fora bushel of wheatin Liverpool the same articles for which I pay 
in New York a bushel and a peck, will anybody tell me I don’t lose 
—apeck of wheat, and lose it by your tariff?” Looks. so, doesn’t it ?. 
wee [Laughter ] : 

But there are two assumptions you perceive on examination; 

first, that under free trade American wheat will be as high at Liver- 
_ pool and British wares aslow. In other words; the learned profes- 
sor assumes that two bushels of wheat bidding for one set of wares 
will get them at the same ‘price as when two sets of wares are bid- 
ding for one bushel of wheat. Verily this seemeth to be the very 
_ thing we are discussing. This was the very point the learned pro- 
- fessor started out to prove. 

Mr. Frank Hurd, the melodious child of free trade, is now tra- 
= versing this country founding a great oration on the same convinc- 
E ing argument, If a laborer with two dollars in his pocket wonina 


eke Mah 4. 


py a 


_ day in protectionist America can buy in Liverpool for one dollar 
- what he-wants and you make him pay two dollars to the Rhode 
Island manufacturers, don’t you cheat him every day out of half his 
day? Dear, departed friend, first great martyr in this great cause, 

why not put it the other way? If a poor laboring man in free- trade 
ee ee without a cent in his pocket, and perhaps no pocket in his 


ee ee See ee kt ge Ee See ee Mies Ae Dalen Oe ec een both oe ge Oe Me arg 
Oye bag ge ny a een ee . ’ me z ; ; 


al 
. 


Peete oY Pra fk Rey Pea a a7 
4 t dine alone ‘7. MET ty ; 
3 oda Sarey a, Dae 


trousers, should find out that ines cost the same in Rhode Island 
and Liverpool, would the happiness he would undoubtedly feel be 


anything more than an intellectual delight? . 

There are only two fallacies in this foundation stone of the new 
Jerusalem. The little one is that what costs one dollar in Liver- 
pool will cost two in Rhode Island. This is rhetoric. Let us pass 


the rhetoric. The big one is that the laborer will get his two dollars 
- under free trade, and goods at Liverpool will be ascheap. This is 


48 “ROMA BREED, 


assumption. I not only point out that all this is assertion aoe not 


proof, but I think I can prove the contrary. 


You asseverate that if part of the people now there left manu- — 


factures and went on the land and produced more wheat we could — | 


supply ourselves thereby with the manufactures we failed to make 


and have a profit, because on our fertile lands we can make wheat 


cheaper than hardware. Perfectly true, if prices would obligingly — | 


keep the same. 

What makes wheat so cheap to-day? So many unexpected thou- 
sand bushels from India. _Would not the same number of extra 
bushels in America have done the same? Would not so many extra 
bushels from America added to so many extra bushels from India 
drive it down at more than double the per cent.? British prices are 
low because the outside world manufacturing for itself won’t buy, 
and these prices have been forced down, say the board to investi- 
gate, etc., 57 per cent. from 1873 to 1885. More wheat from America 


would lower prices of wheat just as more manufactures under tariff 
have lowered prices of goods. Whata jolly rise those same prices — 


would have if we supplied our lost manufactures by import. [Ap- 


The great folly of this most taking free-trade argument is the 
reasoning from the individual to the nation. If you should suspend 


_ the tariff laws for a single man he could, beyond a doubt, buy in > 


Liverpool for a bushel of wheat what in New York costs a bushel 
and apeck. But would it not be the same if the laws were sus- 


pended as to all? By no manner of means. ‘‘ Why not,” says the 


- plause.] iota 


~ 


eis 


| 


~ 


free-trader; ‘‘is not the nation made up of individuals?” Certainly; a, 


but compared with one individual the universe is practically unlim- 
ited. He can move round and disturb nothing. Sixty millions of 
him make a big disturbance when they move. 

Let me give you an illustration from Wall street. I suppose that 
when a distinguished man, an ex-minister to England, which is the 


least of his distinctions, a man whose perceptions are of such deli- 


cacy that the present President reminds him of Abraham Lincoln, 


of blessed memory, has without reproach compared protection to a ; 


= _ THOMAS B. REED. 49 


three-card monte, I may refer to Wall street without censure. 
[Laughter and applause on Republican side. ] 

The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Scott] who, by the wis- 
dom of the Speaker, so well represents the wishes of his State on the 
Committee on Ways and Means was once an honored director in the 
Lake Shore and-is now an honored director in the Canadian Pacific. 
Suppose he were to say to one of his friends—to me, for instance, for 
I like to dream of such a good thing—you have a hundred shares of 
Lake Shore. They pay 4 per cent. and sell at 92. Canadian 
Pacific’s sell at 59 and pay 3 per cent. Canadian Pacific is a better 
road. Interstate-commerce bill favors it and the President is 
friendly. [Laughter. } 

Sell your 100 Lake Shore and buy 156 Canadian. You will get 
$468 instead of $400 for income and lots of nice chances. I could do 
that as per programme. My sale of 100 Lake Shore would not 

depress that stock. My purchase would not raise the Pacific. But 
suppose 5000 men tried the same transfer—nay, 500—what would be — 
the result? Canadian Pacific would go up like a rocket and Lake 
_. Shere down like a stick, and there would be 500 badly disappointed 
it men, and the more of them there were the more disappointed they 
would be. If ever the Democratic party, under the lead of the 
learned professor, on the ground that.one man can save apeck of ~~ 
| wheat by trading with Liverpool instead of New York, puts this , 
ee | whole nation at the mercy of Liverpool, we shall be a lucky people 
_ 4_if we get back the basket. emery 
| People say that these tariff discussions are dull and tiresome, but — : 
there are always delightful things in them. I don’t know whenI 
have bathed my weary soul in such a reverie of bliss as I did while © . 
the chairman, by the aid of Edward Atkinson, and the great’ ~ 
‘doctrine of labor-cost, was explaining that the high wages of our 
work people were not an obstacle,-but the very reason itself why 
the whole circumambient atmosphere should be flooded with the — 
pauper sunshine of Europe. [Laughter.] 3 

The more you pay the workman the less the “‘labor-cost.” The 
more you give your shoemaker the less the shoes cost. The former, 
he explained, is the cause of the latter. Less ‘‘labor-cost” is pro- 
duced by higher wages. The higher the wages the lower the labor- 

cost. No limitation, of course, was set to so divine a principle. 
The only limit to lowness of ‘‘labor-cost” is our generosity to the — 
laboring man. Give infinite dollars to the laboring man and ~ 
things will cost nothing. [Laughter.] Surely no frantic orator 
~ on labor day, the session before e.ection, ever offered to the horny- 


‘th 


NY A Pee i agg ee wee mare Wome ie Dae et) Res c athe Ne 
gta I ME SE LS Tle St ONAN Se SSR SAE ST Sige ONO eRe a 


z 


Rice »\ a Se ae ae Ss Ph, eek, oe ENR ST Oe Mer eee RES EE en ee Shea ak Pe 
net ie “5 4 = aa é > 


= 30 


50. é THOMAS B. REED. 


mitt eka ef Eater Bs 


handed sons of toil such a sweet boon as the great doctrine of 


m*“Tabor-cost.” 


But softly, my friends. This is not the millennium. It is not 
the heavenly Jerusalem newly descended. It is only the old 
Jerusalem of the Jews, sacred but ancient. It is the old, old fact 


' that the smarter the workman the better the pay, and the manu- 


facturer makes more out of him besides. Itis not an absolute fact. 
It is a relative one. It only means that a better workman in the 


game country can get better pay than a poor one, and is worth it 


and a percentage over. It is a valuable fact, but it is an old one; 
and if Mr. Atkinson, reputed an able man, ever gave such an 


extension to that idea as his pupil has, he must be one of those 


men who discover a full-fledged planet with moons whenever an 
asteroid comes within his field of vision. 
But the pleasure given by the great doctrine of ‘‘labor-cost” is 
soon lost in the admiration at the cool courage of what follows. 
Stimulated by the theory of ‘‘ labor-cost,” the chairman ordered an 
investigation into the oldest manufactories in New England. What 
was the result? Why, constantly increasing wages and constantly 


- decreasing cost; the two very things his side has sneered at since 


tariff debates were invented, higher wages for the worker and 
lower prices for the consumer. 

What industries did he select? Cotton sheetings and cotton 
prints; cotton goods, the very articles, and perhaps the only articles, 
which have had continuous, unbroken, effective protection since 
1824. He selects industries which, under allftariffs, have had sixty- 
four years of solid protection, shows by them higher wages for labor 
and lower prices for consumers, then boldly wraps the flag"6f labor- 


— cost about him and proclaims toa wondering world that tariff has 
nothing to do with wages. I wonder what Edward Atkinson 


thought of his new disciple at that moment. 

Oh, no; tariffs have nothing to do with wages. It is coal and 
steam and machinery. But what set up the machinery? What 
caused the cotton factory to be built? ' Why, the tariff. So, then, 


the tariff built the mill, set up the machinery, the machinery in- 


: - creased the wages, but the tariff did not. Is not that very much 
- like saying your father was your progenitor, but your grandfather 


wasn’t? [Laughter.] How could you improve machinery you 
didn’t have? How could you increase the efficiency of machinery 


that didn’t exist? 


Perhaps now would be a good time to introduce the Chairman’s 


yard of cassimere. I hate to invite this respectable audience into 
- even this small Sahara of figures; but really there are oases in it, 


BPEL 5 THOMAS B. REED. 61 


In the original it is one line and a half, specimen of a whole column. 
Here it is: 3 
‘One yard of cassimere, weighing 16 ounces, costs 188 cents; the 


 labor-cost is 29 cents; the tariff is 80 cents.” Borrowing from the 


rest of the column he means, as you will see if you read it, ‘‘ You 


_ pretend, you manufacturers, that you want a tariff for the laborer; 


and here you are, 29 cents to the laborer and 80 cents tariff: 51 cents 
into your infamous pockets.” 
This is certainly bad. I do not remember ever seeing such a 


startling exposure of cold-blooded villainy. Why, a robber baron 


of the middle ages, dead and buried five hundred years ago, with 
nothing left of him but his-coffin, would rise at such a charge and 
hurl back as indignant contempt asif he had been a Kentucky mem- 
ber charged with refusing hearings on midnight revenue reform. 
But let us repress our feelings. May be that this news is like the 


_ news we used to get from Texas during the war, “Important if © e 
_. true.” And itis not true. <A yard of cassimere selling at 138 cents, 
_ weighing 16 ounces, and paying 80 cents tariff is an impossibility. 


Just permit me to prove it. 
First you take off 27 cents discount for selling. This includes:all 


other incidentals. That leaves 111 cents. Take off 80 cents, the 


alleged tariff. That leaves 31 cents. That is cost. YouseeI am _ 
liberal. No extras there. Now, if 31 cents is the cost and the goods 


_ are invoiced honestly—you see, I am again liberal—what is the duty? 
It will be largest under the woolen schedule. Therefore we will 
take that. It can only be 35 cents a pound and 35 per cent. ad va- 


lorem. The 35 cents is compensatory for the wool duty paid by the 


‘manufacturer. The 35 cents is 35 cents. Add 35 per cent of 31 cents 


10.85 cents—and you have 45.85 cents, which must be your tariff.- 


But 45.85 cents added to 31 cents cost and 27 cents for selling gives 


only 103.85 cents instead of 188 cents, which shows dead the sum | 
doesn’t prove. . 

_ Now listen to what the rate must be: 138 cents is the agreed 
price; 27 cents off for selling leaves 111. Now, the fixed specific 
tariff on a pound of cassimere is 35 cents. Take that out and there 
remains 76 cents for cost and ad valorem duty at 35 per cent. In 


other words, 76 is 135 per cent. of the cost. Therefore the cost is 


56.29 cents, and the ad valorem tariff is 19.71, which added to the 


85 cents specific is 54.71 cents. Adding them all together you have 


188 cents. This proves. Now let us see what ratio this bears to the 
rest of the calculation of the learned chairman. LTighty cents tariff, 


- taking out 29 for labor, gave the heartless manufacturer 51 cents; 
54.71 cents will only leave him 25.71. . 


2p. my 
oe _ . 
ait “ _ 
Sn Sa . 


O29 THOMAS B. REED. 


Can he get away with that? How lucky he would be if he could. 
Out of that he has got to pay just 35 cents to the woolman, tariff on 
his wool. In fact, the 35 cents a pound in the tariff is put there for 
that very purpose. So, according to the chairman’s theory, this 
. poor robber baron has got to put his hands into his own pockets and 


me pay 9.29 cents of his own money besides what he gets from tariff. 


Really any intelligent robber baron would go back to the middle 
ages, where he certainly had no such luck. [Laughter and ap- 
plause. | . 

Of course these figures are of no real earthly value except ta 
prove the absurdity of a line and a half specimen of the chairman’s 
speech: He started out grandly. Go to, he said, I will pay this 
man’s labor and show he pockets 51 cents a yard besides; all out of 
the tariff. The chairman does not realize that 51 cents a yard profit 
on cassimere is a colossal preposterousness. He does not have even 
a suspicion of it. 

_Between the two kinds of free-trade orators the manufactur- 
ers have a poor chance. One of them, like the chairman, proves the 
inordinate profit of 51 cents a yard, and shouts loudly against the 
infinite extortion and the piled-up wealth. The other, like the 
member from Massachusetts [Mr. Russell], who seems to have a 
valuable assortment of unknown facts, proclaims the wide-spread 
bankruptcy of woolen manufacturers and then wants to know, in an 
equally loud tone of voice, how we defend such a beggarly business 
as this. When one insinuates 51 cents profit for every yard, and the 
other testifies to bankruptcy, we have between them a millionaire 
insolvent and a beggar rolling in wealth. [Laughter.] 

When the chairman asserts more than 60 per cent. profit on 
woolens and the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Russell] declares 
that no nation but ours taxes imported wool, while the last 
publication of the State Department shows at least sixteen, one 
hardly knows which to admire most, the stupendous imagination of 
the gentleman from Texas or the rigorous accuracy of the gentleman 
from Massachusetts. 

After all, this exaggerated idea of the profits of manufacturers is 
at the bottom of the chairman’s feelings. Whenever I walk through 
the streets of that Democratic importing city of New York and look 
at the brownstone fronts my gorge always rises. I can never 
understand why the virtue which I know is on the sidewalk is not 
thus rewarded. Ido not feel kindly to the people inside. But when 
I feel that way I know what the feeling is. It is good, honest, high- 

minded envy. When some other gentlemen have the same feeling 
they think it’s political economy! [Great laughter. ] 


pt 


ip 2 THOMAS B. REED. 58 


_ ‘Why have I spent so much time on this wretched little yard of 
cassimere? Simply because it isa sample of a whole column which 
has been put forward here as the finest result of the free-trade 
intellect; and there are eighteen more just such palterings with 
common-sense. 

Before I leave cassimere let me add one word. One of the chief- 
est arguments on the stump of the free-trader is that our tariff 
taxes are on the necessities of life. Why shouldn’t they be, if pro- 
tection makes cheaper? The chairman has already shown how 
cheap cotton is. Let Matthew Arnold tell about woolens. Here I 
have him in the Nineteenth Century, April, 1888: 


On the other hand, for that immense class of people, the great bulk of the 
community, . . . things in America are favorable. . . . Society is organized 
for their benefit. . . . Luxuries are, as I have said, very dear, above all 
European luxuries, but the workingman’s clothing is nearly as cheap as in 
England, and plain food is, on the whole, cheaper. Even luxuries of a Cer- 
tain kind are within the laboring man’s easy reach. 


[have thus gone over, well or ill, the real arguments on the other 
side, all that are really worth touching, as there is in all these 


rhetorical battles much artillery firing which comes from unshotted 
guns. They make as much noise as real artillery. They obscure 


the heavens also with much smoke, and they seem to the careless to 
contribute to the dead and wounded. Some of these I must ask you 
to examine, for it is really worth while to see what a part smoke 


_. -and noise play in this world. 


‘‘Monopoly,” said Horace Greeley, a doctor of laws, and once a 


candidate of the Democratic party for the Presidency, ‘‘ monopoly 
is, perhaps, the most perverted and misapplied word in our much- 
abused mother-tongue.” How very tame this language is. I sup- 


pose that during the ten years last past I have listened in this Hall 
to more idiotic raving, more pestiferous rant, on that subject than on 
all the others put together. And yet Ido not regret it. What a 
beautiful sight it is to see the revenue-reform orator go into action 
against monopoly. Nelson, as he stood blazing with decorations on 
the decks of the Victory on the fatal day of Trafalgar; Napoleon at 
Friedland, as the Guard went cheering and charging by; Thomas 
Sayers as he stripped for the championship of England when Heenan 


had crossed the lifting waters; the eagle soaring to his eyrie; the 


royal man-eating Bengal tiger in his native jungle; nay, the very bull 
himself, the strong bull of Bashan, as he uplifts his bellow over the 


_ rocky deserts of Palestine, are all but pale reminders of one of these 


net 


” 


SOAS ne Se OT NS ERD NRL RD Cape cree ea sho een § Roe Fda Mee 
oy ce ‘THOMAS B. REED. 
majestic creatures. [Laughter.] And yet, outside the Patent Office — 
there are no monopolies in this country, and there never can be. 
Ah, but what is that I see on the far horizon’s edge, with tongue of 
Jambent flame and eye of forked fire, serpent-headed and griffin- 
clawed? Surely it must be the great new chimera “Trust.” Quick, 
cries every masked member of the Ways and Means. Quick, let us 
lower the tariff. Let us callin the British. Let them save our devas- 
tated homes. Courage, dear brethren. Be not too much disturbed. 
The Lord will reign even if the board of mayor and aldermen should 
adjourn. ee 
Call in the British ! When the day comes that this Republic can- 
not save itself from a dozen of its own citizens without aid from over 


the sea, I hope to be buried a thousand leagues under some respect- 


able and permanent mountain range. What unreasonable talk this 
is. A dozen men fix the prices for sixty million freemen! They — 
can never do it. There is no power on earth that can raise the 
price of any necessity of life above a just price and keep it there. 


_ More than that, if the price is raised and maintained even for a short 
while, it means ruin for the combination and still lower prices for _ 
consumers. That is one of the laws of God working for His chil- 


dren. Compared with one of your laws of Congress, it is a Levia- 
than to a clam. , 
Doubtless there are evils in this word to be corrected by law. But ~ 
let us go atit with sense. The kindly bear who flung a paving stone © 
to drive away a fly which disturbed his sleeping friend killed the ~ 
man and did not hurt the fly. : 
But if the revenue-reform orator on the monopoly is terrible, 


like an army with banners, there is a theme on which he can take 


up the notes of the dying swan. How we do love to hear him on 
the impoverished farmer. Then he is not sublime, but he is pathet- 
ically great. I heard him first ton years ago. To me, innocent, 
untraveled, it seemed as if the Western farmer was the most woe- 
begone, down-trodden, luckless, unsuccessful, dispirited devil on the 
face of the earth. The Eastern vampire had mortgaged his farm 
and thrown down his fences, and scattered his substance wantonly 
to the winds. 
In the fullness of tirie I traveled West myself. You may well 
imagine my astonishment, who had never seen 10 acres together 


- in corn, to behold fields of that great staple stretching way out to 
- the horizon’s edge, to see tracts of land which seemed to have no - 


boundaries but the visible sky; land so rich that if we had an acre 


of it in Maine we would have sold it by the bushel [laughter], — 


a “+ 


- 


THOMAS B. RHED, — . 55 


while on every siae were the great brick ‘houses, such as only the 


squire lived in in our villages. After some days of this I became 


sulky. I said, gentlemen, of course we have robbed you; your 
Congressmen would not lie about trifles like that. But what dis- 


gusts me is that we did not do it more thoroughly. The gleaning 


looks bigger than the harvest. These crumbs are finer than the 
food we put on our tables. Then they confided to me that the 
Western Congressmen were great orators and did this for practice. 
[Laughter.] Since then I have not been so much moved by it. 

Here is another unshotted gun called ‘‘ the markets of the 
world.” The markets of the world! How broad and cool these 


words are. They stretch from the frozen regions of the northern 


pole across {the blazing tropics to the ice-bound shores of the Ant- 
artic continent. All this we can have if we will but give up the 
little handsbreadth called the United States of America. What 
are these markets of the world? anes 

To hear these rhetoricians declaim, you would imagine the 


_markets of the world a vast vacuum, waiting till now for American 


goods to break through, rush in, and fill the yearning void. Will 
your goods go to Austria, to Italy, Germany, Russia, or France? 


- Around all these benighted countries are the ‘‘Chinese” walls of — 


tariff taxes. Britain herself is protected by vast capital, accu- 
mulated through ages, the spoils of her own and other lands, by 


a trade system as powerful as it is relentless. All these nations 
-will contest with you the other countries which they already over- 
—.- flow. 


Does your mouth water over the prospect? What market do 
you give up for all this? Where is the best market in the world? 


Where the people have the most money to spend. Where have ~ 


the people the most money to spend? Right here in the United 


States of America after twenty-seven years of protectionist rule. 


And you are asked to give up such a market for the markets of 
the world! Why, the history of such a transaction was told twenty- 
four hundred years ago. It is a classic. You will find it in the 
works of A’sop, the fabulist. 

Once there was a dog. He was a nice little dog. Nothing the 
matter with him except a few foolish free-trade ideas in his head. 
He was trotting along happy as the day, for he had in his mouth 


a nice shoulder of succulent mutton. By and by he came toa 
stream bridged by a plank. He trotted along, and, looking over © 


the side of the plank, he saw the markets of the world and dived 
for them, A minute after he was crawling up the bank the wettest, 


56 _ THOMAS B. REED. 


the sickest [great laughter], the nastiest, the most muttonless dog 
that ever swam ashore! 

We have now spent twenty days in the discussion of the Mills 
bill. Have you noticed what has been the most utterly insignificant 
thing in the discussion? The most utterly insignificant thing in the 
discussion has been the Mills bill. How do you account for it? I 
will tell you. If the principles you have enunciated are true, it is an 
unworthy compromise with Satan. If the principles we have stated 
are true, it is an unworthy ambuscade, and you know it. You mean 
this merely for one step. You mean to cut deeper next time. You 
mean the destruction of the system which now exists. 

The whole case can be put succinctly in a few words. If the 


principles you announce are true, you must have direct taxation. If © 


the dollar you pay the custom-house on the import is followed by a 
dollar to the manufacturer for every like quantity of domestic goods, 
which your tariff accidentally encourages, then that manufacture is 
a misfortune. It takes dollars out of the farmer or lawyer without 
return. It is no reply, under this Government, to say that the indi- 
rect collection of two dollars, one-half of which is lost to the people, 
is easier because the poor fools don’t know it. 

That is the old quotation made from Colbert by the gentleman 


from West Virginia. Surely in this country you do not avow that — 


you are trying to get ‘‘the maximum of feathers out of the goose 


for the minimum of squalling.” You don’t mean to take feathers — 


- out of the American goose and deny him the poor privilege of noise. 
No, if our proud bird ought to surrender feathers he is plucky enough 
to surrender like an eagle, and if it is a tax alone he has a right to 
see just what feathers go. ; 

The forefathers of these Democrats saw this, and, like the honest 
men they were, clamored for direct taxation. They were right. 
Why do not you act like them? Why not be bold? Why do you 
hesitate? It is because twenty-seven years of knowledge divide you 
from them. In your heart of hearts you suspect your own logic and 
you dare not. You may well hesitate. Whoever takes down the 
map of 1860 and the map of 1888 will look upon the most wondrous 
growth that ever the sun shone on in all its myriad courses around 
the earth. It is a marvelous spectacle. It is not alone the great 
cities, born like exhalations, which flash prosperity over the great 
lakes, over the broad plains, over the mighty fields rich with verdure 
or teeming with uncounted harvest. It is not alone the piled-up bil- 
lions under which the great national debt caused by the greatest war 
' expenditure the world ever saw has melted like an iceberg under a 


tae 


et found by. ae most ee udetahmigs of our aay that a 
ealth and 2k aie has been sO shaped that it seeks Mai 


oie Abraham Lincoln loved, and ee are of nent the chief in 7 


f this pepe: Teena applause. 


See ee oe) ea, ety, ey ng Wi ane Cece caer Mgt. ta 
7 at he ‘ 
™. 


HON. BENTON MCMILLIN, 


OF TENNESSEE. 
(Democratic Side.) 


Next in importance to personal liberty is the question of how and — 
how much the people shall be taxed; and this is the subject for con- 
sideration to-day. Asit pertains to taxation it is no new question, 
but was with us in the beginning of our Government, and will be 
with us to its close. He who advocates the present tariff favors a 
tariff not for revenue, not for protection merely, but a tariff for sur- 
plus and a tariff for trusts. nes 

We are confronted with an anomalous state of affairs. "We have, — 
locked up in the Treasury, beyond the demands of the Government, — 
about $108,000,000 and will have $150,000,000 in June, or $2.50 for 
every inhabitant—more than $230 for every day since the Saviour 
was born into the world. What is the cause of this overflowing 
Treasury? What is the cause of this accumulation beside which 
that of all other countries sinks into insignificance? What is the 
cause of hoarding in the Treasury at Washington more money than ~ 
_ is gathered into the treasury of any monarchy, kingdom, or despot- 
ism under the sun? The answer to all these questions is, the people 
have been taxed beyond the reasonable demands of the Government. 
Robbery of them under the forms of law has been perpetrated; and 
to-day they stand moneyless, the tax-gatherer staring them in the 
face, and demand relief at our hands. Will we give it, or will we 
withhold it? : * 


LABOR TROUBLES. 


I have had access to the advance sheets of the forthcoming third 
annual report of Hon. Carroll D. Wright, Commissioner of Labor. 
I wish to quote from it to show that twenty-seven years of alleged — 
protection has not resulted in that peace, quiet, and prosperity to 
the laborers which it was claimed would follow it. : 

In the six years from 1881 to 1886 there have been strikes in 22, 336 
establishments. Of these, 16,692, or 74.74 per cent., were in the States x 
58 3 


~ so 


Ls eae oe ne 
ns oH saa 
‘a sf ee .. 


ae _ BENTON M'‘MILLIN. 59 


of New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Ohio, and Illinois, where 
protection is claimed to have wrought such wonders for the laboring 
man. 

There were lockouts during the same period. in 2,182 establish- 
menis. Of these 1,981, or 90.8 per cent., occurred in the five States 
named. The number of employés striking and involved was 1,324,152. 
In addition to these there were 159,548 employés locked out, 31.22 per 
cént. of whom were females. 

Of the 22,336 establishments in which strikes occurred, the 
strikes in 18,342, or 82.12 per cent. of the whole, were ordered by 
labor organizations; while of the 2,182 establishments in which 
lockouts occurred, 1,758, or 80.34 po cent., were ordered by: com- 
binations of managers. 

Concerning the loss to employés resulting from these disturb- 
ances the report will say: 


Understanding, then, the difficulties in ascertaining the exact loss of em- 
ployers and employés as resulting from strikes and lockouts, reference may 
be had to the summaries, where the information which has been collected 
is grouped. The loss to the strikers, as given in these tables, for the period 
involved was $51,819,163. The loss to employés through lockouts for the 
same period was $8,132,717; or a total wage loss to employés of $59,951,880. 
This loss occurred for both strikes and lockouts in 24,518 establishments, or 
an average loss of $2,445 to each establishment, and of nearly $40 to each ~ 
person involved. 


_-_ 5 
- 


Will any gentleman say, in the face of these great disturbances, 

that the condition of the labor of this country is entirely satisfac- 

tory to the laborer? Has he derived that unmixed blessing from 

high taxation which was promised him? The tendency of our pres- 

ent legislation, I regret to say, is to make millionaires and paupers. 

- Under the lower tariff rates of years gone by, when taxation was 

- imposed to carry on the Government, the word ‘‘tramp” was not — 

daily and hourly heard. The anarchist, the socialist, and the com- 
munist were also unknown in our midst. 

Our rate of wages is higher than the rate in the Old World, and 

- would be under any tariff law that we would impose. The gentle- 

man from Texas has very tersely demonstrated the fact that the 

higher our wages the lower the labor cost of the product. If tariffs 

give high wages, why is it that labor in England is so much higher 

than it is in France or Germany, the latter countries having pro- 

_ tective tariffs and England having none? Why is it that our manu- 

facturing journals of this country begin to declare that the danger 


ig 
tad 


BO BENTON M«MILLIN. 


Far 


ae a NU WE eS ae a ON a eee ee ee a eee 8 ee 
a REA Ce gets ee a oa ans ra wa 
BON tes. t 


of our people lies in the cheap labor of Germany instead of the cheap 
labor of England? 

With the highest-priced labor in the world, we send over their 
tariffs to Germany and France, having the cheap labor, machiner~, 
stoves, ranges, hardware, tools, machine-needles, mechanical aud 
scientific instruments, cutlery, fire-arms, printing-presses, locks, 


hinges, sewing-machines, clocks, watches, and pianos, and so far as — 


I have been able to trace the relation I find that the more labor we 
get into a commodity the more certainly we can compete success- 
fully with the old country. One of the manufacturers of pianos 
alone in this country sends five hundred pianos per annum to Eng- 
land. . 


PRESIDENTIAL RECOMMENDATIONS. 


I congratulate the country that we have reached the point where © 


there is a fair chance for the consideration of a bill looking to the 
reduction of the taxes on the necessaries of life. Heretofore the 
favorite method pursued in the killing of tariff bills was either by 
refusing to consider them or by striking out the enacting clause. 
But I think we are fortunate in having before us now a bill which 
this Congress dare not refuse to consider, and of which its members 
dare not be rash enough to strike out the enacting clause. For 
many years different Presidents have called upon Congress to dis- 
charge its duty and diminish taxation. 


President Arthur called the attention of Congress, in his first — 


annual message, to our excessive taxation in the following language: 


It seems to me that the time has arrived when the people may justly de- 
mand some relief from their present onerous burden. 


In his second he said: 


I heartily approve the Secretary’s recommendation of immediate and ex- 
tensive reductions in the annual revenues of the Government. 


In 1888, even after the present law was passed, in his annual 
message he said he had no doubt that still further reductions might 
be wisely made. 

But not ready to settle the question, Congress shifted its responsi- 


bility off to a tariff commission, and sent a band of itinerant patriots - 


around the country to report what ought to be done. That commis- 
sion consisted of men who were appointed from different industries 
because of their known favor to them; but the public clamor for tax 


reduction was so great and the necessity for it so patent that even. 


an 


fe BENTO M'MILLIN. 61 


: they could not ignore the fact, and they reported that there should 
be a reduction of from 20 to 25 per cent. The Congress that ap- 
pointed them, finding the rate of taxation averaged about 43 per 

. cent., under the pretense of revising it, left it so thatit has since 

_ reached 47 per cent., and the people have had no relief. Itis higher 

to-day than it was any time during the late civil war. 

Worn out with waiting, disgusted with the hesitation of the Con- 
gress that misrepresented the best interests of the country, they 
freed themselves from those who appointed the commission and re- 
fused to heed its recommendation, and sent here a different ott 


vai ~ 


representatives, and to the White House aman of a different politi 

party. 

President Cleveland, in his first annual message, urged Congress 

~ to give this relief; and the Ways and Means Committee reported a 
bill making reductions averaging about 20 per cent.; but the gentle- 
men on the other side of this Chamber, aided by a few on this, re- 

_- fused to even consider the bill, declined to make any effort to better 

~ it. A good many were left at home, and others were sent here in 

their stead, and still the question is here. 

I quote the following from the last annual message of President 
Cleveland, who seems to have felt the gravity of the situation, and 
had all the manly courage and able statesmanship necessary to dis- 
charge fearlessly his duty and let the consequences take care of 
themselves: 


- When we consider that the theory fof our institutions guarantees to every 
citizen the full enjoyment of all the fruits of his industry and enterprise, with 
- only such deduction as may be his share towards the careful and economical 
‘maintenance of the Government which protects him, it is plain that the exac- 
tion of more than this is indefensible extortion and a culpable betrayal of 
_ American fairness and justice. This wrong inflicted upon those who bear the 
burden of national taxation, like other wrongs, multiplies a brood of evil con- 
sequences. The public Treasury, which should only exist asa conduit, con- 
veying the people’s tribute to its legitimate objects of expenditure, becomes a 
hoarding-place for money ncedlessly withdrawn from tradc and the people’s use, 
thus crippling our national cnergies, suspending our country’s development, 
preventing investment in productive enterprise, threatening financial disturb- 
ance, and inviting schemes of public plunder. 


that is accumulating and the evils that are likely to grow out of it. 
Weare drawing money from commerce and locking it up in the 
Treasury at such a rate that it is only a question of time when 
stringency will set in, panics begin, and ruin follow. We are rob- 


me Twill be pardoned for commenting a little more'upon the surplus — 


ey. cites. : Wa f : fap faeces = x, ; ee ss Te aed Ah AOE ON ent Clg toe ee 
p62 BENTON M‘MILLIN. ‘ ms 


bing not only commerce of its life-blood, but the people of the means 
of paying their taxes to their governments—municipal, county, 
State, and Federal—and their debts to their creditors. All sorts of 
jobs are proposed to Congress and all sorts of jobbers are flocking 
: here. There is nothing conceivable more corrupting to government 
than a plethoric treasury. It revives stale demands; it encourages 
the prosecution of matters long since set at rest. 


WHO RESISTED TARIFF REDUCTION ? 


ae 
- 
Tae 
sa 
eS 
mY 
ce 
=e 


The gentlemen of the minority in presenting their views have 
commented with severity upon the fact that hitherto the Democratic 
party has not reduced taxation. The gentleman from Ohio [Mr, — 
McKinley] is credited with the authorship of that document. Listen 
to the arraignment with which he adorns the pages of his florid 
production: 


‘eae If it be claimed that for the most part during the Democratic control of 
the House the Senate was dominated by the Republican party, and therefore 
the responsibility of failure to reduce the revenues should be alike shared by 
them, we answer that under the Constitution of the United States the House 
alone can originate bills to reduce taxation, the Senate having no jurisdiction 
of the subject until it is given to it by a bill which passes the House, and that 
during all these years no such bill has gone from the House to the Senate, 
and therefore the sole responsibility for failure rests with the present majority 
in the House of Representatives. 


Now, sir, I know of no better person to answer this charge made 
by the sentleman from Ohio than the gentleman from Ohio himself. 
He made a speech in Congress a few years ago in which he with 
equal severity arraigned the Democratic party for attempting to 
reduce taxation. I quote from that speech, and it will be observed 
that in this last quotation, which was his first utterance, he takes 
upon himself and the small number of Democrats whom he could 
get to act with him the responsibility with which he now charges © 
the Democratic party: 


The Democratic majorities in the Forty-fourth, Forty-fifth, and Forty- 
sixth Congresses, although committed by party utterances and by platforms, 
as well as the pledges of leaders, to a reduction of duties toa revenue basis, 
were unable, with all their party machinery and the free use of the party 
lash, to accomplish even a step in that direction. Every proposition for a 
change was met with the almost solid opposition of this side of the House, 
which, with the assistance of a few Representatives on the other side from 


Beg ee z aks Pee be, 4 oy oe 7s 
=? 7 


BENTON M‘MILLIN. | ‘ 68 


Pennsylvania and the New England States, was strong enough to insure and 
did insure the substantial defeat of every measure looking to a disturbance of 
the existing tariff rates. . 


What shall we ‘think of statesmanship which, forgetting its own 
record, charges upon its antagonist that which it has confessed to 


- be its own fault ? 


atthe same time. He put a tax upon incomes, and a tax upon rail-- 
roads. He put a tax upon the capital and deposits of national 


INTERNAL REVENUE. 


Sir, the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr._Kelley] © 


aad 
aa CAR 


has delivered an able and characteristic speech, clamoring for the . 


total repeal of the internal-revenue system. He arraigns the Demo- 
cratic party for not repealing it; and without stint or moderation he 


uncorked and poured forth his vials of wrath upon that system and _ 


upon those who now refuse, at his behest, to create a deficiency by 
repealing it. Was the Democratic party the author of this law ? Did 
the Democratic party put it upon the statute-book ? Did we enact 
those stringent provisions under which citizens have been incar- 


-cerated, under which property has been seized and destroyed with- 


out process of law, and under which the Federal courts of the 


country have been filled to overflowing with men charged with — 


violation of the internal-revenue laws? No, sir. 
The gentleman from Pennsylvania imposed other internal taxes 


. banks. They were taxes.on accumulated wealth, which at all times 


should be made to help support the Government that protects it. 


_ Those taxes have all been removed, and by his help; but the one 
_ that he says works hardship he never removed. Imagine my sur- 


prise when I turn back to the REcorD and see among those who 


enacted this law the name of the distinguished gentleman from 


Pennsylvania. When charging long and loud that we refused to 
repeal the system, does he forget that only five years ago he was 


- chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, was the leader of the 


House of Representatives in the Republican organization, and that 
upon him devolved the responsibility of framing a bill for the reduc- 
tion of taxation to relieve the people from burdens? 


-- Does he forget that ten years before that occurred he had an-_ 
nounced publicly, privately, and everywhere that he was in favor of 
_the repeal of the internal-revenue system, and yet does he now for- 


get that he failed then to do, or even to propose to do, the very 
thing which he now says the Democratic party is culpable for not 
doing? Then he had responsibility resting upon him, and was care- 


a 

i 
Be 
£ 


64 BRENTON M‘MILLIN. 


ful about his action. He said then that he favored taking them off, 


but did not doit. [Applause on the Democratic side. ] : 

Mr. KELLEY. - He proposed to repeal the internal taxes— 

Mr. McMiuur. I remember the gentileman’s utterances. I 
remember his coming before this House and saying he favored the ~ 
repeal of that system, but that his caucus had determined otherwise 
and that he bowed his neck to the yoke. [Applause on the Demo- 
cratic side. | 


Mr. Keutey. Has not that been done with like effect now by 


the Democratic caucus? 

Mr. McMiuury. No, sir. Why does not the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania offer a substitute now and show that his side would 
repeal those taxes if the responsibility rested upon them to-day? 

Mr. KELLEY. When we come to amendments you will find that 
I will offer one, and make you vote on it, too. [Laughter on the 
Republican side. ] 


Mr. McMiuuin. Does your party favor a youd repeal of internal 


taxes? 
Mr. Kriury. I speak for myself [jeers on the Democratic side], 
and say I do. 
Mr. MeMILuin. Who will speak for your party if you, the oldest 
member on that side, will not? [Applause.] : 
I do not propose to vote for such an amendment while its adop- 


tion would create a deficiency of $60,000,000 a year, which would — 


have to be raised by increase of taxes on necessaries. [Applause on 
the Democratic side]. 

And I think I voice the Democratic party when I say they will 
not doso. [Applause. ] | 

When I come to a point, Mr. Chairman, where I have to select 
the subjects upon which I will place taxation, I believe it is sound — 
political policy to place ‘it upon those things that the people can do 
- without, which are not essential to their.very comfort and existence, 
rather than upon the necessaries of life. I have striven to mollify. 
~ internal-revenue laws, and by this bill more is done in that direction 
than by any other ever Pe to Congress since the system was 
inaugurated. 
Now, when interrupted I was going on to state the facts concern- 
ing the internal- -revenue system. It yields, in round numbers, one 
hundred and twenty millions of revenue to the Government. The 
annual surplus is-only about sixty millions; so that if all the internal- 
revenue laws were repealed, it would leave a deficiency in our taxes 


of sixty millions a year. What is this deficiency to be raised — ep 3 
from? Shall we reimpose a tax on tea and coffee? No, Thereis 


~ 


BENTON M‘MILLIN. 65 


not a man here who would retax coffee to untax whisky. Shall we 
_ increase the duties on woolen goods, rice, or sugar? No; for the 
_ people would not and should not tolerate any such legislation. Then, 
gir, we have to select the subjects from which we will reduce taxes; 
and in view of the fact that we cannot repeal the internal-revenue 
_ system, we have to determine whether we will reduce the tax on 
whisky or the tax on clothing; the tax on whisky or the tax on 
sugar. In other words, reduce the tax on that without which men 
can live and prosper, or upon that which is essentialjto their very com- 
fort and existence. When it narrows itself down to a contest be- 
_ tween the drinking man’s appetite and the poor man’s back, I do not 
hesitate to say that we espouse the cause of the back, and defy the 
world, the flesh, and the devil in the fight. [Laughter and applause. ] 
No, sir, the gentleman from Pennsylvania did not repeal the in- 
ternal taxes when the opportunity was presented to him. He would 
‘not do so to-day if upon him rested the responsibility of leadership of 
this House. Not only did he not do that, but he did not repeal those 
oppressive and obnoxious statutes without which the system could 
have been run in the beginning and can be successfully operated 
now. But there was a class to whose rescue he rushed. There was 
_aclass when they held up their hands to the distinguished gentleman 
and said ‘‘ Help me, Cassius, or I sink,” for whom he braved the tide 
- and the waves, and rushed into the flood to their rescue. There had 
_ been a tax imposed upon the capital and deposits of banks and on 
checks. If it ever landed anybody into the Federal courts, we did 
~ not hear of it. If it ever bankrupted anybody, we never knew it. 
_Ifit ever worked any serious hardship, the man has not appeared — 
_ upon whom it was wrought. It yielded to the Government more 
than eleven millions of dollars annually. It was a tax on wealth; 
_ yet these were the people in whose behalf, with feverish anxiety and 
_ impetuous haste, the gentleman from Pennsylvania made his ex- 
~ ertions. 
: Your patent-medicine man, ‘‘ Mrs. Winslow’s Soothing Syrup,” 
_ perfumery and cosmetics, and all manner of nostrums, were also the 
- recipients of his statecraft and patriotic efforts, but when it came to 
_ free the citizen from the oppression that destroyed his property— 
without due process of law—it was so insignificant a subject that the 
distinguished gentlemanjnever made an exertion to mollify the hard- 
- ship of any law or to better the condition of any citizen.. 
Listen to the plaintive wail with which the gentleman from Penn- 
_ sylvania speaks of the oppressions of taxation when it is imposed on 
national banks, those poor corporations created by the Government, 
_ to whom it has loaned its credit with such lavish hands, and that 


-: : < 
A oo 


66 BENTON M‘MILLIN. ~~ 


have never paid a single dollar of taxes on the bonds upon which ; 
their circulation is founded to the county, State, or National Gov- 
ernment: 


I confess that I cannot see the reason that animates any man to wantonly re- 
tain a tax on bankers for the mere purpose of branding them invidiously and ~ 
locking up in idleness in the Treasury of the United States the taxes abstracted 
from them.—Oongressional Record, Forty-seventh Congress, first session, page 
5192. : 


But the distinguished gentleman has not the same sympathetic 
anxiety for the man who pays high taxes on sugar, high taxes on ~ 
salt, high taxes on clothing. Although such a man has no money 
deposited in bank; although he has no bonds that are not taxable © 
upon which he gets a circulation to be loaned out to the people; al- 
though he lives after the commandment of God, ‘‘ by the sweat of 
his brow,” my distinguished friend is not able to see that it is wrong — 
to take money from him that the Government does not need and 
lock it up in the Treasury. It makes all the difference in the world © 
with the gentleman from Pennsylvania whose ox is gored. He says 
the passage of this bill will instantly paralyze the enterprise and 
energy of the people. How reducing the cost of salt, cotton goods, 
woolen clothes, and tin roofing will paralyze any man is hard to 
understand. 

What is the bill that we present for your consideration? Itisa — 
bill which proposes to take $878,000 off of chemicals; $1,756,000 off — 
of earthen and glass ware; $11,480,000 off of sugar; $331,000 off of — 
provisions; $227,000 off of cotton goods; $2,042,000 off of hemp, jute, 
and flax goods; $12,330,000 off of woolens; $3,000 off of books and 
papers, and $1,090,000 off of sundries. It is also proposed toladd to — 
your free-list flax, hemp, jute, chemicals, salt, tin-plate, wool, and — 
other things, amounting to $22,189,000, making in all a tariff reduc- 
tion of $53,720,000. It proposes to°make reductions in the internal — 


» revenue of $24,455,000, or a grand total of tax reduction from 


tariff and internal revenue sources of $78,176,000—more than a 
dollar and a quarter to every individual, or $6 for every family in 
the United States. And the plain, simple question presented here 
to-day is: Will we take this burden off or will we leave it on? 
Will we free commerce, leaving it unshackled, or will we keep it 
hampered ? Will we continue to hoard up a corrupting surplus or 
will we leave the money in the pockets of the people, where it justly — 
belongs? These are the subjects upon which we are toact. The © 
following table I have Pappared to show the rates of duty existing i 
and proposed, 2 3 e 


4 or - 

, ‘ ee ee 
SD ee 

Py Sate oe 


. eee a see ee SR. ee ee Ss at eines : 
BENTON MMILLIN. 67 


é 
Per cent 
Present rate on dutiable goods...........eccce cece eeeees “in vet Pa oundin 47.10 
meee Loposed Tate On Cutiable OOS. oc. oie vee hveis cave oes werapieleis 40.00 
Present rate on articles affected by bill............ ccc cc ee eceeceeeeee 54.16 
Proposed rate on articles affected by bill... 1... 0.0.0... cece eee ceeee 33.36 


Several of the schedules of the more luxurious articles are not touched. 


What more have we proposed for your adoption? We recom- 
mend to you very material changes in the laws governing the col- 
lection of the internal revenue. Heretofore, by statutes of the 
United States, internal-revenue officers have been authorized, upon 

_ the seizure of property which they suppose to be used in illicit distil- 
ling, to destroy it in advance of presentment or indictment of the 
owner or trial, and hence to destroy it without due process of law 
upon mere suspicion. We recommend that you change this, believ- 
_ ing that the Government should not set the example of destroying 
. the property of the citizen until after he has had a chance fora 
hearing before some tribunal of his country. | 
_. The gentleman from Pennsylvania spent much of his time and 
most of his fervor in a tirade against Kentucky, and attributes her 
_ want of development of her resources to the tax on whisky. He ad- 
__voeates the removal of that tax. Iam not going into an extended 
_ defense of that magnificent State or her grand people. They speak 
_ for themselves, and besides have representatives here who are amply 
able to take care of her, even when assaulted by the gentleman from. 
_ Pennsylvania. But I want to stir up his pure mind by way of re- 
- membrance on one little thing or two of which he seems to have been 
_ profoundly oblivious when traducing that State. He had forgotten 
_ the fact that the last annual report of the Commissioner of Internal 
- Revenue shows that whereas Kentucky has 3,702 retail dealers in 
spirits and malt liquors, Pennyslvania has 20,425. Comparing 
_ these figures with the census—and we have no reliable data as to 
_ population since—it gives one saloon for every four hundred and 
forty-five inhabitants in Kentucky and one to every two hundred and 
nine inhabitants in the great State of Pennsylvania. I have to 
‘announce to this House and the country that the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania has revolutionized on the question of free raw mate- 
rials. He stands here to-day clamoring for it. Not free raw mate- 
rials for his factories and furnaces; not free raw materials for his 
a 3 forges and foundries; not free raw materials for his carpet looms and 
_ woolen establishments, but he is exceedingly anxious for free raw 
materials for his twenty thousand saloons. | 
Bis He announced in a speech some years ago that the consumer pays 


oe 
aS. 


Ly Pa ow c Se hot OR os 4 Viele” era ie eRe DS Aye ae ees o CC SL eae ee 
MFT MgSO. eRe GME MCE ED NS TERE Sg Se etiey Re eee Re NL | 


68. e BENTON M‘MILLIN. 


the tax imposed upon the commodity. It is not surprising, therefore, 
that holding to that faith he should wish a little less internal tax oD 
this very flourishing industry. 


PRESIDENT GRANT ON FREE WOOL. 


The minority of the Committee on Ways and Means, and other — 
gentlemen opposing tax reduction, have laid a great deal of stress on 
the injustice done by the proposed removal of the duty on wool and 
other articles added to the free-list. I submit for their consideration 
the fact that among the earliest suggestions—so far as I know, the 
earliest suggestion—since the war for the removal of the duty on wool 

came from the distinguished Chief Executive whom they twice hon- 
ored with an election to the Presidency and attempted to elevate to 
that position a third time, President Grant. In his annual message 
submitted to Congress December 7, 1874, he made the following rec- 
ommendation: 


I would suggest to Congress the propriety of readjusting the tariff so as to 
increase the revenue and at the same time decrease the number of articles upon 
which duties are levied. Those articles which enter into our manufactures © 
and are not produced at home, it seems to me, should be entered free. Ofthose — 
articles of manufacture which we produce a constituent part of but donot pro- 
duce the whole, that part which we do not produce should enter free also. - I 
will instance fine wool, dyes, etc. These articles must be imported to form a 
part of the manufacture of the higher grades of woolen goods. Chemicals — 
used as dyes, compounded in medicines and used in various ways in manufac- 
tures, come under this class. The introduction, free of duty, of such woolsas — 
we do not produce would stimulate the manufacture of goods requiring theuse _ 
of those we do produce, and therefore would be a benefit to home production. ~ 
There are many articles entering into home manufacture which we do not pro- — 
duce ourselves, the tariff upon which increases the cost of producing the man- : 
ufactured article. All corrections in this regard are in the direction of bring- 
ing labor and capital in harmony with each other, and of supplying oneofthe ~ 
elements of prosperity so much needed. 


It will also be remembered in this connection that the first tariff 
law adopted was framed by Madison, the father of the Constitution, 
and contemporaneous with the public service President Washington 
and Mr. Jefferson left wool on the free list. I would digress also 
far enough in this connection to ask why is it that in all the years 
from that time until 1801 there never was a tariff that aggregated Se : 
per cent. ? 

Of all the sufferers by this oppressive taxation the farmer is the © Pe 
greatest. With wheat at less than 80 cents, cotton at a rate that — 


: 


~~" 


a arene Mee roe ee ty eye ON a NL LS Tet Tey On ca ORM Mage | 


> 


BEN: 1 'ON M‘MILLIN. 69 


barely pays for production, corn so low that it will scarcely bear 


_ shipment, he toils from eight to fourteen hours a day and gets none 


of the benefits of the high tax. He has to sell his commodities in 
the lowest markets of. the world and buy in the highest. The result 
on him has been disastrous in the extreme. The records of agricul- 
tural regions show a frightful increase of mortgages. The mortgages 


~ upon the farmers of the Northwest are startling to contemplate. 


PRESIDENT CLEVELAND ON THE INTERESTS OF LABOR. 


There is a statement made and reiterated by the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania which I think deserves more than a passing notice. 
It is that wherein he speaks of the President’s message as a ‘‘free- 


trade message.” The minority report also uses that phrase to 


characterize it. I am not willing that the opinions of the country 


shall be based upon the assertions of gentlemen who are averse to 


the President in every political sentiment. I therefore read from 


the message itself, that this House and the country may determine 
py nether or not it is a free-trade document: 


It is not proposed to entirely relieve the country of this tariff taxation. It 


~ must be extensively continued as the source of the Government’s income, and 

in a readjustment of our tariff the interests of American labor engaged in man- 

- ufacture should be carefully considered, as well as the preservation of our 

- manufacturers. It may be called protection, or by any other name, but relief 

_ from the hardships and dangers of our present tariff laws should be devised 

. with especial precaution against imperiling the existence of our manufacturing 
_ interests. 


Again: 


It is also said that the increase in the price of domestic manufactures 
resulting from the present tariff is necessary in order that higher wages may 


be paid to our workingmen employed in manufactories than are paid for what 
- is called the pauper labor of Europe. All will acknowledge the force of an 


_ argument which involves the welfare and liberal compensation of our laboring 


- people. Our labor is honorable in the eyes of every American citizen, and as 
it lies at the foundation of our development and progress it is entitled, without 

_ affectation or hypocrisy, to the utmost regard. The standard of our laborers’ 
life should not be measured by that of any other country less favored, and 
_ they are entitled to their full share of all our advantages. 


The following paragraph also bears upon this subject: 


To these the appeal is made to save their employment and maintain their 


wages by resisting a change. There should be no disposition to answer such 


suggestions by the allegation that they are.in a minority among those who 


70 BENTON M' MILLIN. 
labor, and therefore should forego an advantage in the interest of low prices 


for the majority; their compensation, as it may be affected by the operation of 
tariff laws, should at all times be scrupulously kept in view; and yet with 


slight reflection they will not overlook the fact that they are consumers with — 


the rest; that they, too, have their own wants and those of their families to 
supply from their earnings, and that the price of the necessaries of life as well 
as the amount of their wages will regulate the measure of their welfare and 
comfort. 


But the reduction of taxation demanded should be so measured as not to — 


necessitate or justify either the loss of employment by the workingman nor 
the lessening of his wages; and the profits still remaining to the manufac- 
turer, after a necessary readjustment, should furnish no excuse for the sacri- 
fice of the interests of his employés either in their opportunity to work or in 
the diminution of their compensation. 


I wish to compare the record of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, - 


[Mr. Kelley] with that of the distinguished President of the United 
States, whose message he criticises. Let us compare their action on 
one subject that is of vital importance to the laboring man, and see 


if we cannot get some additional light. The.gentleman from Penn- | 


sylvania was a member of Congress in 1864, and on the anniversary 


of our country’s liberty an act was passed by him and those acting ~ 


with him which has only to be read to be most heartily despised. It 
is what is now known as the ‘‘contract-labor law”’ There was a 


clause in the Constitution which forbade the re-establishment of the 


African slave-trade, but this opening of something like a Caucasian 
slave-trade was made legitimate by the statute which I send to the 
Clerk’s desk to be read. 

The Clerk read as follows: 


Suc. 2. And be it further enacted, That all contracts that shall be made by — 


emigrants to the United States in foreign countries, in conformity to regula- 
tions that may be established by the said commissioner, whereby emigrants 


shall pledge the wages of their labor for a term not exceeding twelve months, 
to repay the expenses of their emigration, shall be held to be valid in law, and 
may be enforced in the courts of the United States or of the several States and 


Territories; and such advances, if so stipulated in the contract, and the con- 


tract be recorded in the recorder’s office in the country where the emigrant 


shall settle, shall operate as a lien upon any land thereafter acquired by the 
emigrant, whether under the homestead law when the title is consummated, 
or on property otherwise acquired until liquidated by the emigrant; but noth- 


ing herein contained shall be deemed to authorize any contract contravening ~ 
the Constitution of the United States, or creating in any way the relation of 


slavery or servitude. (U.S. Stats. at Large, vol. 15, 1863-’65.). 


ree 


(oe Pi ake a 


AA ei ae eer Serer ng” | Le teary 


ee BANTONEMITLIN: ORE 


Mr. Weaver. Who signed the act which has been read? 
Mr. McMruur. It passed during President Lincoln’s term; but I 
_ do not know whether it received his signature or became a law by 
ten days’ limitation. 
_ Mr. Kettey. Will you let me say a wordA in defense of Lincoln? 
Mr. McMinurn. Until the gentleman gets through defending 
himself he will have to let Lincoln alone. ‘‘ Physician, heal thy- 
self.” It is not Lincoln who is in danger; it is my friend from Penn- 
Sylvania. [Applause.] 
Mr. Kevitey. Do not violate Lincoln’s grave. 
Mr. MoMiuurn. The gentleman cannot take refuge behind the 
grave-stone of that great and patriotic man. [Applause.] 
Not only were foreigners to be brought here by contract, but 
_ their services for a year were made liable for the fulfillment of the 
contracts, and any little home which they acquired by purchase, or 
even under the homestead act, was to be swept away from them and 
__ their children to satisfy the rapacity of the contractors who brought 
them over. Whenever the operatives in an American mine or at an 
American furnace became dissatisfied with their wages and struck — 
_, for better pay, all that the mine or furnace owner had to do was to 
_ send his agent abroad to the densely populated regions, to the poor 
~ and squalid inhabitants of Russia, Poland, Italy, or other oppressed 
_ region, contract for laborers to take the places of the strikers, and 
_ the machinery worked smoothly again. Whole colonies of Ameri¢an 
_ citizens have been swept away from their places of labor in this 
manner. Who was it that originated a bill repealing this law? It 
originated in a Democratic House of Representatives. Not only was 
the law allowing the importation of contract laborers repealed, but 
~ an amendment was made afterwards, with the approval of President 
- Cleveland, which made the vessel bringing them to this country 
liable for the expense of transporting them back, and by a clause I 
offered, which was adopted, if it failed to do so, prevented it from 
entering in or clearing from our ports. This President Cleveland 
made effective by his approval. I leave this House to determine 
which has manifested the greatest affection and which has bestowed 
_ the greatest blessing upon the laboring man in this case, the honora- 
_ ble gentleman from Pennsylvania or the President whose ee 
he criticises. 
‘Now, Mr. Chairman, in order to show that I do not distort the 
facts of the case, I send to the Clerk’s desk also to be read the 
_ testimony of laboring men, taken before Senator Blair’s investigat- 
ing committee, in my distinguished friend’s State, showing the 
oppression that grew out of the act which has been read, 


ME cel Ra Fae ee ate eS OR, Too) em ape Ser iY Cae 3 ceil Mini Rie ANS MPT AR ire eS bee ge 


was ce - BANTON win" 2o ee 


John Murray, of Shawnee (Ohio) Miners’ ‘Amoctatlon: 

«Our men are deeply interested in the bill against the importation of 
labor, and we expect Congress to do something to remedy the evil. There 
were seven hundred foreigners and seven hundred colored men brought to 
my district during a recent strike.” : 
Fred Turner, of Philadelphia, Pa., secretary of the Knights of Labor, 
said: 

“Tt is the universal sentiment that the bill of Mr. Foran should be passed. 
The importation of foreign workmen is getting as bad as that of the Chinese. 
We have not the slightest objection to their voluntary coming. The African 
slave was better off than are these people under some of these contracts. The — 
slave had some one to look after his welfare: these people have not. We 
present a petition to the committee containing 30,000 names of persons who 
pray for relief by the passage of a bill to remedy this matter.” 


There is another gentleman whom I wish to quote to show the 
importance of tariff reduction. At a time when there was not one 
tithe the necessity or demand for tariff reduction that there is to- 
day, the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Randall] made a 
speech, in the Forty-seventh Congress, in which he used the fol- 
lowing language, and made use of the following strong arguments 
in favor of a reduction in taxation; this, too, when we had out- 
standing, subject to the call of the Government, over $400,000,000 
of bonds, and when the surplus was less than now: 


It is equally true that excessive taxation, even when it is successful in ~ 
securing revenue, is ultimately destructive of the sources of labor from which, 
it is drawn, while at the same time it engenders extravagance, corruption, and 
decay. For when the Government sets the example of extravagance, it is soon 

ollowed in every walk of life, and one does not need to be a prophet to fore- 
“tell the general ruin which must inevitably result. Frugality and economy — 
never destroyed any government, while they have built up the most powerful 
empires the world has ever witnessed. 


And again in the same speech he says: 


The existing overflowing Treasury brings a demand for reduction of the © 
tariff and internal-revenue taxes. In my opinion, in such a condition of our 
finances, reduction of taxation should at once begin. Unnecessary taxation is 
injurious to the interests of the people in many directions. Government has 
uo justification for the collection of burdensome taxes in excess of the sum 
requisite for the support of its proper administration. What have we seen in 
this Congress? The excess of our resources has induced the presentation of 
every conceivable scheme to deplite the Treasury, and our expenditures, 
unless checked in time, will reach enormous proportions and bring back again 
as prior to 1874, a saturnalia of extravagance and disgrace. 


hy Oy Pips 

3 kaa 
ees a a, 
ear 


pre 


7 


Your pOrnenhtes have done the very things that it was stated then 
were necessary to be done. They have prepared a bill for the reduc- 
tion of internal-revenue and tariff taxes. Every bond that was sub- 
ject to the call of the Government when that speech was made has 
been paid. Every dollar of indebtedness which can be discharged 
without the payment of a high premium has been extinguished; 


Per eae sob igsicia css ihe i! Maes h ete RK oa cage en Bia Dac aed eet Me a aE a ee ar a Sipe zat ae a ee eee 


ENTON MMILLIN. on oe Monee 


vast accumulations have been piled up in the Treasury untilits vaults —— 


are fairly bursting with money which ought to be in the channels of 


trade, till there is about $150,000,000 where there was enly a small — 


surplus. This House stands ready to make good the words which he 


used on that occasion. It is ready to give the relief which he said the 


people were entitled to receive. We are ready and willing to remove 
the temptation to corrupt government which he said was always 


found ina plethoric Treasury. We are ready to aid him ininsuring ~ 


to the people that ‘‘frugality and economy” which he said never 


_ “destroyed any government,” and to prevent that ‘‘ saturnalia of 


extravagance and disgrace” which he said characterized the period 4 


just anterior to 1874, “ 


CONSUMER PAYS TARIFF TAXES. 


-It is insistea by some protectionists that the foreign manufacturer 


pays the taxes which are collected from imports. A greater fallacy 


was never attempted to be palmed off on the people. When goods 


reach the custom-house the importer pays the tariff dues; he then _ 


sells to the retail dealer for the original cost, the insurance, tariffs, 


and his commissions added. Upon all of these the retail dealer adds 
a per cent. to pay him for dealing in the goods, and with this per — 
_ cent. added upon the tariff cost he sells to the consumer, who in the ~ 
-. end pays every dollar, both of the original cost, insurance, tariffs, 
~ and the profits of the two dealers through whose hands they pass. 
The tariff duties, therefore, increase by so much the price at which — 
the consumer buys them. There would be more comfort in the ~ 


transaction if the Government got the benefit of all the costs thus 
added. But it is estimated that for every dollar paid into the Treas- 


ury on imported goods there is paid to the manufacturers of this 
country five; so that the tariff taxation costs not only what is paid — 
into the custom-house, but the incidental increase of expense upon 


all, or a greater part, of the dutiable goods made and consumed in 
the United States. 


The lowest estimate that can possibly be placed upon this in-— 
creased cost of commedities to the people is hundreds of millions of © 
doilars. Under what clause of the Constitution can a tax be legally 


oa 


mae 


+e 


RE a dees ear REN hae AN elt git oe BS OE Say AR ge Ne ae 


oi 


Se, 
_ 


are ¢ é 
a ate Vig aw cei a eT 


Br eg eae ey CSE ey ig a eae pL CREST Ty We OMEN Oat aN ne aE 


RENTON wearrLLIN, 


placed upon the people for any other purpose than the neces- 
sities of government? I would also be exceedingly gratified to have 


any man, be he constitutional lawyer or not, explain where is the 


justice in requiring one man to contribute a tax to make another 


man’s vocation pay. 

The following table will show what the increased cost added to 
these classes of articles of domestic manufacture alone has been by 
reason of the high tariff in one year: | 


fn . Domestic Cost added : 
Articles. Imports, 1887. Duties. manufactures,| by tariff 
POT orn cet wic le diaigs eleieis © eee eters $50,618,985 $20,713,233 $296,557,685 $85,000,000 
PSAP L OW Gani ce ksh athe ewclavee’s Soke e os 29,150,058 11,710,719 192,090,110 55,000,000 
BE WOOL. 6. aes a ee ones vein vece screens 44,235,243 29,729,717 267,252,913 107, ‘000, 000 
Tote costadded. Dy tarill 264. ¢chclowek neh nen sp ees Beh ee ah ee ata ren 247,000,000 
* a Kk * * *k * * * 
ae DESTRUCTION OF AMERICAN SHIPPING. atl 


There is another thing to which I wish to call attention in pass- 


‘ing to show the calamitous results which have followed this repres- 
‘sive policy. Under the rule of thisGovernment before we attempted 
“to exclude everything from our markets and forced the people to 


buy in the dearest markets, we had commerce carried on in Ameri- 


~ can ships with all the nations of the earth. The American seaman 


was found in every port, the American vessel breasted the waves of 


oe all waters, and the American flag floated over the mastheads of 


wy eee 


hundreds of ships and over thousands of seamen. We had con- 
queread the lands and triumphed on the sea, and asked no people on 
earth to carry our commerce for us; but instead were engaged in 
successful rivalry, carrying on commerce between the other nations 


of the world. Glory, honor, and empire were ours. But what is 
_ the situation to-day? The Secretary of the Treasury has stated it 


tersely in the following passage taken from his report: 


Thus it will be seen that our foreign commerce, carried in vessels of the 


United States, measured by its value, has steadily declined from 75 per cent. 


in 1856 to less than 14 per cent. in 1887. Even of this small percentage less 
than one-half was carried in steam-vessels bearing our flag. 

A citizen of the United States may buy a foreign-built vessel in a foreign 
port; he may put the United States flag upon it and trade with all the coun- 


tries of the worid except his own. Our Government will protect him with all 


its power in such trade; but if he brings his ship with our flag upon it to one 
of our ports, our Government will confiscate it or impose prohibitory duties. 


BENTON M‘MILLLN: Do By fi: 


He may, however, put the flag of any other country on that same ship and 
bring it to his home without molestation by our Government; it is then pro- 


tected by the power of a foreign country. It is difficult to understand why it — 
would not be well. to so change our navigation laws as to allow foreign-built — 


ships owned by our citizens to come and go between this and other countries 
while bearing the flag of the country of their owners. 


We have absolutely driven our carrying trade from our own peo- 


ple. Pretending to protect, we have done nothing but destroy; pre- _ 
tending to assist, we have only crushed our seafaring industry; pre- _ 
tending to be a friend of the American merchant marine, we have 


been its worst and deadliest enemy, and to-day we carry but 13 per 


cent. of our foreign commerce and pay millions to others to do that — 
work for us; and yet gentlemen come here and propose to undo this ee 


work by subsidies out of the people’s Treasury. 


So extraordinary are our laws that if a citizen of this Government — 


buys a ship abroad and puts the flag of his own country on it and ~ 
comes into an American port his ship is seized by the United States © 
authorities. 


The copper, the iron, the steel, and other ‘materials which enter 
into the construction of a ship bear a duty so high we cannot build, 
and yet gentlemen complain that ship-building in this country costs 


“more than it does in foreign countries, and a cry comes up of the ~ 


decay of our merchant marine while you refuse to give any remedy. 
Sad, sad to the patriotic heart is the reflection that we have go 


‘degenerated in our foreign carrying trade that when the American 
citizen goes to many of the ports of the world accredited as consul and — 


_ desires once more to see the flag of his native land, he looks not out — 
on the broad blue ocean! Alas, itis not there! He must turn sor- — 


rowfully into his own room, delve down into the bottom of his own 


- trunk, and get out the Stars and Stripes he carried with him. 


aa iinociantensbemes 


They propose to counteract the vicious and constricting policy : 


which has béen followed for so many years by levying taxes upon 
those who live inland to make the vocations of those who are en- 
gaged in the carrying trade pay. Commerce cannot be restored in 


that way. It is futile to attempt it. So long as the American — 
citizen can not fly the American flag on any vessel except those built — 
in our ports—and has to pay 30 per cent. more to build his vessel — 
than does the citizen of any other country—so long will we be labor- g 


ing under a disadvantage which subsidy is inadequate to re AY | YY 


[Applause. ] gt 


ra , 


Padme 


- BBNTON MMILLIN, 
LABOR. 


Under what specious plea have we robbed the people, laborers 


men. The gentleman from Texas [Mr. Mills] in the opening of this 
discussion made some illustrations, and quoted some statistics, 
_ which the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Kelly] never an- 


& * swered, and which the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Burrows] I 


- predict, will not attempt to answer. 


and all? Under the pretense that it is for the benefit of the laboring — 


We only have to make a few comparisons to show the utter 7 


fallacy of the claim of the protectionists that the high duties now 
existing were imposed or are kept for the benefit of the laboring 
man. I give the following table, compiled by Mr. Seaton, super- 
intendent, from the Tenth Census, showing the value of various 


- manufactured products in 1880 and the per cent, that the labor cost 
bears to the whole cost. I have also added for convenience the 


_ present and proposed tariff rates, from which it will be seen that in 


plate 
ee 


no instance does the committee propose on these articles a duty less 
than the per cent. of labor cost that is contained in them. 


Table, compiled from Tenth Census, showing value of various manufactured 


products, per cent. of labor cost, rate of duty existing and proposed. 


® 

ae ae 3 

. Value of 2 o& 62 
Industries. product. Labor. $ 3S b z Ss 
og a % ate a 
Ay Qy 
Per cent,| Per cent, 

- Carp CSR Ae Dahl oe aay eee] $81,792,802 $6,835,218 212d 47 80 
Cotton POOUR e's. s Be eee 210,950,383 45,614,419 21.6 50 40 
; OHS AO UtSE CLO se eed uke ts coc ce 10,073,330 1,981,300 19.7 59 35 
“. Nails and spikes RMS Ye  heMarae ate 5,629,240 4,255,171 22.3 43 34 
= TIron pipe, wrought.............. 15,292,162 1,788,258 13.5 70 85 
NORTEL, ALOE 03 2% 3.5 Pele Lewecce et ess 653,900 44,714 6.8 194 97 
: Oil, limseed..- 02.6... e eee ener sees 15,393,812 681,677 4.4 54 21 
Screws ig Ep Tae Need gh Soe ea a 2,184,532 456,542 20.9 50 35 
ME VOL NANT e css, s. cao ah cece voce 8,516,569 1,893,215 no 2 54 40 
uate W OGIEN POOGS. .<'. s.cs.0cccseiaces 160,006,721 25, 836. 892 pod ie ~ 


Worsted goods..............05-. 33,549,942 5,683,027 


e 


4 
4 
Ras 


It will thus be seen that while the labor in carpets, leaving off 


_. fractions, is 21 per cent. of the cost, the tariff is 47 per cent. In 
_, cotton goods the labor is the same and the tariff 50 per cent. In 
wecught-iron pipe, labor is 13 per cent, and the tariff 70 per cent. 


In castor-oil, labor 6 per cent. and the tariff 194 per cent. In wool 
hats, the 'abor is 22 per cent. and the tariff 54 per cent. In woolen 


ae labor is 16 per cent. and the tariff 70 per cent. In worsted 


goods, labor is ‘4 per cent. and the tariff 68 per cent. I do not 


WODeS 7 net 


A aiea? BENTON M‘MILLIN. oy 


blame manufacturers and capitalists for wanting to form a partner- 
-. ship with the laboring man when such a small per cent. of all the 
cost is labor when compared with the rate of duty imposed. 


COMPLAINTS OF THE MINORITY. 


The gentlemen who signed the minority report complain of the 
manner in which the bill under consideration was prepared. I haz- 
ard nothing in saying that if their wishes in this regard had been 
complied with, and an attempt made to do all the work in full com- 
mittee at odd times, when the House was not in session, June would 

have reached us without any bill before this House; for it will be re- 

membered that when a request was made for the committee to sit 

during the sessions of the House it was opposed by the gentleman 
_ from Michigan [Mr. Burrows], a member of the. Committee on 
_- Waysand Means. What right have they to complain? The ques- 
tion is not how, when, or where the bill was prepared, but what is 
the bill? Is it good or bad? They are in no attitude to complain in 
- ,any event, because it is a well-known fact that the very gentlemen 
__ who signed the minority report in 1883 railroaded through Congress 
_~ a bill which was not only never prepared by the Ways and Means 
~ Committee of the House, as is contemplated by the Constitution, 
but was never read in the House of Representatives. The tariff law 
which we now seek to amend thus became a law without the mem- > 
bers of Congress ever having heard or read it. Hence I say they 
are in no attitude to criticise anybody for any method adopted in 
_ the framing of a tariff bill. 


INCONSISTENCIES OF PRESENT LAW. 


_ The minority complain at what they are pleased to call the incon- 
_ gistencies in the bill. Let those inconsistencies be what they may, 
they are not a tenth nor a hundredth part of those found under the 
present law, which these gentlemen helped to force upon the coun- 
. try. Let us take a few illustrations. Woolen yarns bear a duty of 
69 per cent.; the higher-priced cloths of wool bear a duty of only 68 
_ per cent., the cheaper dress goods a duty of 67 per cent., and the 
higher 59 per cent., while the ready-made clothing into which the 
- cloths are made bears a duty of only 54 per cent. Take wool; let it 
_ be scoured, carded, spun, woven, and made into cloth by the card-~ 
ing process, and it bears a duty ranging from 68 to 89 per cént. 
But take the same wool, wash it, or scour it as you did before, and 
comb it, so that when spun and woven it is worsted cloth, and it 
_ bears a less rate of duty than is imposed on woolens. Whoever saw 
. “ : > 


Sully 0 MW un Naa callie a eR nce Sl cat eg 
v5 veg bok eae ee ee Leer Ft | Th Sant 


pt, 


} 


Ox 


713, | BENTON M‘MILLIN. 


a more glaring inconsistency in a tariff bill than this? Nor is this 
confined to woolen goods. Look to cotton goods. Colored tarlatan 
has a duty of 250 per cent., while ruchings, that are made there 

from, bear a duty of only 35 per cent. Come down to the metal 

schedule. Hoop-iron not thinner than No. 20 bears a duty of 47 per 
cent., while cotton-ties, made of this same hoop-iron, bear a duty of 
only 35 per cent. Pig-iron bears a duty of $6.72 per ton, while die- 

blocks, etc., made of pig-iron, bear a duty of only $6.04 per ton. In 
this way, and by this kind of ‘‘ tinkering,” almost every worsted 
establishment in the country claims to have been on the verge of 
bankruptcy since 1883, when the iniquitous tari under which we 
are now living was adopted. 

If these gentlemen had attempted to put a premium upon the © 
closing up of establishments on this side of the waters and opening 
them on the other, they could not have been more effectual than — 
they have been by this inconsistent, incongruous tariff which we are 


_ now trying to amend; and yet they complain that there is not con- 


sistency in the bill which we present. There is another fault to be 
found with the present tariff law which we have striven to remedy 
by the bill which we present for your adoption. In almost every 
schedule of the present law it will be observed that the coarser the 
goods and the more likely they are to be worn or used by those in 


-the humbler walks of life the higher the rate of duty fixed upon 


them; and the converse, of course, follows, that the more luxuriant 
the article the lower the rate of duty. We have attempted in the 
tariff which we present for your adoption to so frame it that the tax 
would bear most heavily upon luxuries and those things without 
which the people can live, rather than upon the necessaries of life. 


Hence we have reduced the tariff on the metal schedule, but have — : 


not lowered it on jewelry; we have reduced it on woolen goods, and 
have not lowered it on silks; and we have reduced it on sugar and 
taken it off of salt, but have not made one farthing of reduction on 
liquors, wines, etc. 

There is an objection to our economic training of the day that. 
may be justly urged. That is, the tendency to inculcate in the 
people a desire for paternal government. We are striving to teach 
our people concerning tariffs and almost everything else that they 
cannot prosper in their business pursuits without they are fortified 


“by United States statutes; we are trying to inculcate in them the 
belief that upon Congress depends the amount of their wages, the — 


numberof hours which they shall labor and their prosperity or 


adversity in their industrial pursuits. There never yet was an 


assemblage of lawmakers wise enough to devise laws which should % 


S  RRRrON MMILLIN, 


Pechtral and repuilate ios things with perfect satisfaction to’ all. 
_ They must be left to their own best regulation. They are controlled 
_ best when they are controlled least. What*is the result of this — 
- teaching? When you teach the people to look to government to do 
_ this you teach them to look for that in which they must inevitably 
- be disappointed; and when the disappointment comes, believing that 
_ government_is to blame for all the calamities that overtake them, 
_ they first become dissatisfied with it, then get to be lukewarm 
Bi toward it, and may finally hate it. 
j Woe will betide the day when the laboring people of the United 
f States come to believe that Congress, and it alone, can give them ~ 
_ prosperity or adversity in their industrial pursuits. It is better to 
follow the old doctrine of the fathers, to protect the citizen in his 
_ life, his liberty, and his pursuit of Happiness and leave him to do 
; the balance unhampered by legislative restraint and undeluded by 
demagogic flattery and folly. I now and then am most profoundly 
' disgusted by hearing some man, while sawing the air with his hands 
and splitting the ears of the sroundlings with his tongue, proclaim 
Z that the American citizen cannot stand the least competition with 
_ the men of other countries. I am an American born, an American 
er; by instinct, an American in all my affections, and Iam never going 
BS to do the people of the United States the injustice to suppose that 
God ever created a race of human beings on this earth who can 
Z “successfully put down the American citizen in his race for supremacy 
_ inall that is right. [Applause.] I do not believe it now; I never 
- will believe it until I shall have seen it tried and demonstrated that 
iam wrong; and he does himself injustice, he does his sires injustice 
_ and his sons injustice, who holds to the doctrine that we are a 
a generation of pygmies to be overridden by other people without we 
2 have Congressional legislation to aid us. 
_ __Protectionists are peculiarly unfortunate in the different argu- 
ments to which they resort to accomplish the same end. With 
7 seemingly bland simplicity, they tell the workman that he wants 
4 protection to give him higher wages. They turn round and in the 
_ same breath tell the citizen who pays these taxes that he wants pro- 
_ tection for the purpose of giving him cheaper clothes; for, they say, 
“home competition inevitably does this.” They tell the manu- 
_ facturer he wants it to give him greater profits. How the same law 
Fis going to give cheaper clothes to the poor man, higher wages to the 
- laboring man, and greater profit to the manufacturer they do not 
 deign to show. But it is not for the laboring man that this claim is 
' really made; it is not for the man who pays the taxes that it is 
made; but it is corporate capital disguised as the ‘“‘friend of the 


C8 BO RENTON MALLE, 


eee SS ee OO ee oe 


laboring man and the ace that is ers this Bs ve tee 
will not be denied by any that we have the most fruitful and fertile _ 
soil, combined with the most genial climate in the world. We have, — 
taken as a class, the most industrious people and the highest inven- — 
tive genius in the world. There is no other country on the earth — 
that takes so few of its young men from the industrial callings to go — 
into the military and naval service as does ours. These things — 
being so, is the day not at hand or fast approaching when all of this — 
energy, this inventive genius, this freedom to work in industrial 

pursuits, will not be satisfied or prosperous in simply making what 
it can eat and wear? 


EXTEND OUR MARKETS. 


We must have other and broader markets. I say to-day to those 
living on the coasts that to them will first ‘come the calamities of a 
restricted market. In the early history of the country our large — 
cities were stretched along the coast, and those in the interior labored — 
under great disadvantages. But railroads have changed our com- — 
merce, and just inside of this line of border cities have sprung up ~ 
other cities which are as prosperous and promising as those on the — 
seacoast. They are rapidly taking the trade from the seacoast, and — 2 
those who live upon the ouiskirts will soon find their only refuge 
from decay will be upon the broad ocean, and there they will have to | 
turn. They cannot always beat down their neighbors in their own — 
markets. They haveto get out in the world or go down in the con- — 
flict. The time will come when New England will not be able to bie * 
cotton in the South, manufacture it 1,200 miles away, pay two trans-— ‘3 
portations, and sell it in competition with mills running beside the — 
cotton-fields. 3 : 

Take my own State as an illustration. "We are far in theinterior, 
Originally we were a fine market for the products of Pennsylvania — : 
and the Eastern manufactures, but to-day we are doing much of our _ 
own manufacturing. Instead of going abroad for commodities wé a 
are sending them abroad. We are sending our marble from ocean to — td 
ocean; we are shipping our coke hundreds of miles; ouriron, carried i 
through Pittsburgh, is beingsold as far east as Boston, and the gener: . 
ation is now here that will behold the auctioneer fot Alabama and — 3 
Tennessee standing upon the custom-house steps of the city of Pitts- — 
burgh auctioning off pig-iron in sight of furnaces from which the 
smoke is no longer curling. But the wheels of industry there will — 
not be stopped thereby, but can we employed converting this pig into ” i 
new forms. 


ois 5 eee 7 oa “ini ar aay ’ oa Caan Sele A Oe ies 


T hold in my hand a piece of steel made by the Henderson process 
at Birmingham, Ala., out of our Southern iron, high in phosphorus, 
at a cost, as the president of the works tells me, of $18 a ton. Amer- 
ican pluck, energy, and inventive genius again triumphant! 

I regretted to hear the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania 
speak of the fact we have not further developed in the South. I do 


_ not recur to the past for any purpose, except for the lesson of wisdom 


which it teaches. God forbid that in my heart there should be found 
a corner dark enough to wish misfortune to’any quarter of this grand 
country. [Applause.] I am for every foot of it, wherever that 
glorious flag floats [pointing to the flag over the Speaker’s desk] or 
our eagle soars. [Prolonged applause.] In contemplating what has 
already been done there, I am not surprised that we have done so 


little, but Tam astonished we have done so much. When the war 


closed we had eleven millions of people in the South. And of the 
eleven millions, the combined wealth of six millions of them above 
indebtedness would not have bought one suit of clothes. To-day we 
stand triumphant over misfortune. Irecur to this not to criticise 


-any, but to rejoice with all. [Applause.] 


On the gloomy outlook for 


NEW ENGLAND MANUFACTURES. 
I quote from a gentleman who lives in New England, a very distin- 


guished diplomat under the last administration—I mean the Hon. 
.James Russell Lowell. (Laughter and applause on the Republican 
-. gide.] He was a diplomat and the representative of your adminis- 


tration accredited to the Court of St. James. [Applause on the 


Democratic side. ] 
- Mr. KELLEY. Benedict Arnold was a major-general in the 


re Continental Army. [Applause on the Republican side. ] 


Mr. McMILLIN. My friend from Pennsylvania has shown by 
his interruption and speech that he lives in the past and the past 
only. 

Mr. KELLEY. Yes; and you will, too, when you get to be as 
oldasIam. [Applause.] 

Mr. McMILLIN. My sincere hope is that the gentleman’s years 
may be lengthened out for many summers yet. [Applause. ] 

Isend to the Clerk’s desk to be read an extract from a speech 
made in New York on the 13th mstant by Mr. Lowell, whose name 
has aroused so much ire on the other side of the Chamber. 

The Clerk read as follows: 


All tbat reasonable men contend for now is the reduction of the tariff in 


/ Buytox MaMILLIN, ky | — 6B 


\ 


Rn Ks oh DNA Sat Pad Neb aati Bm 2 ne Fy ak jt OS BS ash inle Ni fa Se ai pene. ie Se, 20h ee 


go | - BENTON MMILLIN 


such a way as shall be least hurtful to existing interests, most helpful to the 
consumer, and, above all, as shall practically test the question whether we are 
better off when we get our raw material at the lowest possible prices. I think 
the advocates of protection have been unwise, and are beginning to see that 
they are unwise in shifting the ground of debate. They have set many people 
to asking whether robbing Peter to pay Paul is a method equally economical 
for both parties, and whether the bad policy of it be not all the more flagrant 
in proportion as the Peters are many and the Pauls few? Whether the Pauls 
of every variety be not inevitably forced into an alliance offensive and defen- 
sive against the Peters? Whether if we are taxed for the payment of a 
bounty to the owner of a silver mine we should not be equally taxed to make 
a present to the owner of wheat fields, cotton fields, tobacco fields, which are 
the most productive gold mines of this country ? Whether the case of protec- 
tion is not like that of armored ships, requiring ever thicker plating as the ar- 
tillery of competition is perfected? 

I confess I cannot take a cheerful view of the future of that New England 
I love so well, when her leading industries shall be gradually drawn to the 
South, as they infallibly will be, by the great cheapness of labor there. It is 
not pleasant to hear that called the American system which has succeeded in 
abolishing our foreign commerce. It is even less pleasant to hear it advocated 
as being for the interest of the laborer by men who imported cheap labor till 
it was forbidden by law. That protection has been the cause of our material 
prosperity is refuted by the passage I have quoted from Burke. 

Of the surplus in the Treasury I will only say that it has already shown it- 
self to be an incitement to every possible variety of wasteful expenditure, and, 
therefore, of demoralizing jobbery, and that it has again revived that theory of _ 
grandmotherly government which is most hostile to the genius of our institu- — 
tions, and which soonest saps the energy and corrodes the morals of the 
people. 

Mr. McMinn. Lest I should forget it let me now answer another 
of the positions taken, upon which the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
laid great stress in his speech. It will be remembered that he stated 
that by indirection the committee had placed iron ore and coal on om 
the free-list. That is absolutely without any just foundation. It 
was not the purpose of the committee to do it, it did not attempt to 
do it, and has not done it. 

This the committee has left untouched. 

Under another section the following is found, which was made 
free by us: 

Mineral substances in a crude state and metals unwrought, not specially 
enumerated or provided for in this act, 20 per cent. ad valorem. ; 


Now, it will be remembered that those things which we did not 
touch in that law are left as the law now provides. That is the basis 


st te oR 


a hee Ae Beek) Be \, . VA ee ee ae Be” See, ae ee RS Tae ee ves. Ler ore , a 
an VP hal Doak: iA c" -% .* i. ie oF het (oA bere ps hs) 7, " 3. 
w bet J A yet RNY ce aes oe in Ct Bes PR Ae aimee et ; : iy Sy 

; . , » Lait 4 } 


ARES i asia hag 
7 : BENTON M‘MILLIN. 83 


on which the bill is framed and upon which we expect it to be sus- 
tained. ; 

Mr. Bayne, of Pennsylvania. But what do you make of the 
proposition on page:59, where it provides: 


And all laws and parts of laws inconsistent with the other requirements 
and provisions of this act are also hereby repealed. 


Mr. MoMiturn. My friend will remember we only affect those 
things named in the bill, and the provision relating to iron-ore is 
not named—therefere is not affected by the bill, therefore not 
inconsistent with the bill, and therefore not repealed by the clause he 
cites, 

Why, my friend will bear witness that we do not touch the duty 
on jewelry, for instance, in this bill; and yet it would not be claimed 
that that provision he has cited would have reference to jewelry and 
put it on the free-list. We do not touch wines or liquors, and they 
cannot be claimed to be on the free-list. We do not touch the silk 

. schedules, and yet they are left right: where they were. And so 
~  T might go on through the bill. Many luxuries we have not lowered, 
and they remain as in the existing law, notwithstanding the repeal- 
ing clause read by the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Bayne]. 

This is an amendment to existing law, and therefore the classifica- 
tion in the existing law remains unless specifically amended or 
altered by this bill. } 
Mr. Mituren. Will the gentleman allow me a question ? 

Mr. MoMitutn. I cannot trespass upon the time of the House 

- much longer.. I have now spoken nearly two hours, and although 

the House has been very kind to me I must not abuse its favor. More 
than $10,000 of surplus has gone into the Treasury while I have been 
speaking, to be locked up, and we must hasten on. 
“Mr. Miuurcen. Iam sorry. I hope $10,000 more will go. Ialways 
like to listen to the gentleman. 
Mr. McMiuuiy, I thank my friend for his compliment. 


TRUSTS AND POOLS. 


Let that deluded statesman who believes that the high duties 
which we have thrown around our country can ever insure to the 

- people low prices for commodities behold the situation to-day. For 
years we have had these halls ringing with statements that by and 
by home competition would give us the lowest possible prices. The 
welkin has been made to ring with this declaration, iterated and 
reiterated, until even_those who first proclaimed it have almost 


’ ? 
et 
4" = 
“a 
ke * all — 
“a a 
eo cae a a 


we 


are OT) T Sars JRO TA ga ee eS OE Re in oe ore ind ge ee ee A Oe ce rN, Salk Ey cree ey at age 9 ot eS en a 
Sr SE oe RE RB IY Spee CRD ke Fe ae SER Se Se IE Ae ee ee 


see 


84 BENTON M‘MILLIN. 


gotten to believe it. But look at our unfortunate situation and let 
this delusion be dispelled. While the Government has thrown up 
its tariff walls without, monopolists have joined hands within for 


the purpose of putting up prices and plundering the people through | 


the devices known as trusts, pools, and combines. 

Mr. Foran, of Ohio. Will the gentleman permit me to ask him 
how under this bill it is possible to prevent the formation of trusts 
either in this or in other countries? | 

Mr. McMiuurn. I am glad my friend asked that question. 
It is easy of elucidation. You cannot absolutely prevent the 
formation of the trusts, but you make it vastly more difficult 
for them to control as you extend the area over which they are to 
operate. 

Mr. Foran. Another question. Is it not true that the only 
remedy for trusts is competition? | 

Mr. McMinuin. Why, competition does not amount to a straw 
when they get together and determine with each other that they will 


not compete, and that they will close up every new establishment 


that starts and refuses to join the trust. 

Mr. Chairman, we have the steei-rail trust, which cost the people 
of this country last year millions of dollars. It is not a trust to 
increase production, but to restrict it; it is not a trust to give 
cheaper commodities to the people, but to put bigger profits into the 


pockets of the monopolists. It has closed furnaces that were 


successfully running; it has, aided by the tariff, increased by more 
than $1,000 the cost of every mile of railroad built in the United 
States for the last five years; it has thrown men out of employment 
and broken up the means of living of thousands of workingmen. 
Why, even the existence of this trust has been denied; but listen to 
this quotation from the Bulletin of the American Iron and Steel 
Association, a paper printed in the interests of the iron and steel 
producers of the United States, and at their cost. 

Under the head ‘‘ American iron market for steel rails” we find 
the following: 


STEEL RAILS. 


One of the makers reports sales during the week aggregating 6,000 tons. 


Outside of this no transactions whatever are reported, and the market is 
extremely dull both East and West. The board of control has decided upon 
an increase in the allotment of 200,000 tons. which will relieve the pressure on 
some of the Eastern mills. 


It would seem from this very business-like statement that the 


‘board of control” is not misnamed, and absolutely ¢ontrols the 


Pet. 


, ee eee fee ee eT Ge Ge ee a eR re ee ORL oe Ee yl hh SR! Le rae rh ib 
os oa 


BENTON M‘MILLIN. 85 


output of steel rails in this country. It determines when it shall be 
increased and when restricted, being careful only to maintain prices 
up to the cost of foreign goods with the duty added. 

Have the gentlemen of the minority proposed anything 


better! Have they framed a bill to be adopted in lieu of ours? 


Have they told the House and the country what remedy they 
recommend for the evils which all admit to be upon us? No, sir. 
They are mute as to a remedy; they are dumb as to relief. 

I tell them that policy will never win with a tax-ridden, a monop- 
oly-oppressed people, a people weighed down by trusts, pools, 
and combines. This is not a do-nothing occasion; ours not a 
do-nothing people. I have no fear concerning the ultimate 
result of this conflict between the people and the ‘‘pool.” Ihave no 
fear as to the outcome in the contest between the country and the 
combine. I have no apprehension as to who will be victor in the 
battle about to be waged between legitimate taxation and that 
oppressive taxation which is invoked to aid trusts and make pooling 


_ profitable. The people have waited long and patiently. But at last 


they are aroused. Their voice comes thundering through these halls 
demanding reduction of taxes. ‘Justice has had to travel with a 
leaden heel, but is ready to strike with an iron hand.” The pro- 
cession for the relief of the tax-payer is moving. There are but two 
places about this procession—one after it, the other under it. Seek 


to-day, sirs, whether you prefer to follow and aid it, or go down 
-under it and be crushed by it. [Prolonged applause. ] 


HON. WILLIAM MCKINLEY, JR., 


OF OHIO. 
(Republican Side.) 


Our country is in an anomalous situation. There is nothing re- 
sembling it anywhere else in the world. While we are seeking to 
find objects to relieve from taxation, in order that we may relieve an 


overflowing Treasury, other nations are engaged in exploring the 


field of human production to find new objects of taxation to supply 
their insufficient. revenues. In considering the situation that thus 
confronts us, and the bill that is presented here as intended to relieve 
it, it is well that we should understand at the beginning the things 
upon which all are agreed. 

They are, first, that we are collecting more money than is’ re- 
quired for the current needs of the Government; and second, that 
the excess, whatever it may be, beyond the wants of the Govern- 
ment should be left with the people. Our contention, therefore, is 
upon the manner of the reduction and not upon the reduction itself; 
not that no reduction shall or ought to be made, but how and upon 
what principle can it best be accomplished. We agree, further, that 
the tax upon tobacco shall be removed and thus leave with the people 


- $30,000,000 which they annually pay upon this domestic product. 


Were we men of business, governed by the principles which guide 
practical men of affairs, this burden would have been and could have 
been removed any time within the past two years, and if removed 
two years ago no surplus would now vex the Administration or 
alarm the business of the country. In passing, it is suitable that I 
should say that within the period named no hinderance from this 
side of the House would have been interposed to the abolition of this 
tax. 

_ It is also suitable that I should say, for the sake of the truth of 
history, that gentlemen on this side and gentlemen on the other side 
of the House repeatedly made efforts during the last Congress to 
secure recognition for the purpose of offering a bill to abolish this 

wv 8&6 " 


, 


WILLIAM M‘KINLEY, JR. Sood 


tax, which request was refused by the presiding officer of the 
House, and refused, too, when every intelligent representative 
on this floor knew that if an opportunity was given to vote upon 
a bill for the abolition of that tax it would have received not 
simply a majority, but the vote of fully two-thirds of the House. I 


_ repeat that if that had been done, if the House as then organized had 


given to the representatives of the people an opportunity to vote 
upon a simple proposition to reduce taxation, no immediate surplus 
would be now in the Treasury to interrupt and disturb the business 
of the country. [Applause on the Republican side. ] 

But this tax was not abolished, and if done now still leaves about 
forty millions of revenue collected in excess of the public necessity. 
How can this amount be remitted with the least disturbance to the 
business and employments of the people ? 

- This is the real, the practical question. At this point parties 
and individuals differ, and herein the two lines of political 


_ thought which have prevailed from the formation of the Govern- 
-meni are clearly manifested, and present for the consideration and 


the ultimate judgment of the people the division between the Re-— 


_ publican and Democratic parties upon a purely economic question. I 


cannot forbear, in this connection, to congratulate the country that 
upon this question our fellow-citizens of all sections and all national- 


ities, without regard to past party affiliations, unbiased by prejudice, 


-and uninfluenced by passion, can divide. Here is presented an issue 


_. which leaves the past behind and looks.only to the present and the 


future, an issue without a tinge or touch of sectionalism, which 
awakens none of the bitter memories of former discord or divisions, 


which appeals neither to race nor geographical lines, which knows no 


North, or South, or East, or West, but brings all within its sweep and 
contemplation, each dividing upon what each may honestly regard ~ 
for the best interests and highest welfare of all; an issue which we © 


can consider and discuss calmly and deliberately, having only in ~ 


view the future of the individual citizen and the highest and best 


destiny of the Republic. In this spirit I welcome the issue so — : 


sharply, and I may say boldly, made by the President in his annual 
message and now further made by the bill under debate, and ap- » 
proach its consideration with the single purpose to reach if possible 


—_ aconclusion which shall bring to the country and the whole coun- 
_ try, with whose interests we are temporarily intrusted, the widest 


benefits and the most lasting good. [Applause. ] | 

It will be freely confessed by our political opponents that this bill 
is but the beginning of a tariff policy marked out by the President, 
and is a partial response only to his message, to be followed up with 


~ 


Ro RR ie Seats FREE ES IS Ere eee gy A ener a ae ee 


88 WILLIAM M‘KINLEY, JR. 


additional legislation until our system of taxation shall be brought 


~back to the ancient landmarks of the Democratic party, to a purely 


revenue basis; that is, that the tariff or duty put upon foreign im- 
portations shall hereafter look to revenue and revenue only, and dis- 
card all other considerations. 


WHAT IS REVENUE TARIFF? 


This brings us face to face, therefore, with the two opposing sys- 
tems, that of a revenue as distinguished from a protective tariff, and 
upon their respective merits they must stand or fall. Now, what 
are they? First, what is a revenue tariff? Upon what principle does 
it rest? It is a tariff or tax placed upon such articles of foreign pro- 
duction imported here as will produce the largest revenue with the 
smallest tax; or, as Robert J. Walker, late Secretary of the Treasury 
and author of the tariff of 1846, from whom the advocates of the 
measure draw their inspiration, put it: 

The only true maxim is that which experience demonstrates will bring in 
each case the largest revenue at the lowest rate of duty, and that no duty be 
imposed upon any article above the lowest rate which will yield the largest 
amount of revenue. The revenue (said Mr. Walker), from ad valorem duties 
last year (1845) exceeded that realized from specific duties, although the aver- 
age of the ad valorem duties was only 23.57 per cent. and the average of the 


specific duties 41.30 per cent., presenting another strong pis that the lower 


duties increase the revenue. 


To secure larger revenue from lower duties necessitates largely 
increased importations, and if these compete with domestic products 
the latter must be diminished or find other and distant and I may 
say impossible markets or get out of the way altogether. A genuine 


‘ revenue tariff imposes no tax upon foreign importations the like of 


which are produced at home, or, if produced-at home, in quantities 
not capable of supplying the home consumption, in which case it 
may be truthfully said the tax is added to the foreign cost. and is 
paid by the consumer. 

A revenue tariff seeks out those articles whose domestic produc. 
tion cannot supply, or only imadequately supply, and which tha 


wants of our people demand, and imposes the duty upon them, and. 


permits as far as possible the competing foreign product to be im. 


_ ported free of duty. This principle is made conspicuous in the bill 


under consideration; for example, wool, a competing foreign pro- 
duct. which our own flock-masters can fully supply for domestic 
wants, is put upon the free-list, while sugar, with a home product of 
only one-eleventh of the home consumption, is left dutiable, 


mt 


WILLIAM MKINLEY, JR. 83 


_ Any tax levied upon a foreign product which is a necessity to our 
people, and which we cannot fully supply, will produce revenue in 


amount only measured by our necessities and ability to buy. Ina 
_word, foreign productions not competing with home productions are 


° 


_ the proper subjects for taxation under a revenue tariff, and in case 
these do not furnish the requisite revenue a low duty is put upon the 


foreign product competing with the domestic one—low enough to en- 


courage and stimulate importations, and low enough to break down 


eventually domestic competition. For example, the duty proposed 


under this bill upon cotton bagging will extinguish thé industry 


- here, and under its provision we would import all of that product 
- from Calcutta and Dundee. A large revenue would come from this 
_ source, because the foreign would take the place of the domestic pro- 
- duction. This duty is a revenue one, and gives no protection what- 
_ ever to the home producer. If it did it would not be a revenue tariff. 
_ As the Cobden school of political science puts it, ‘‘The moment it is 
- made clear that a tax is a benefit to home producers, then the free- 


se trade dogma condemns it. The test is simple and easy of applica- 


tion. Free-trade or a revenue tariff does not allow any import 
_ duties being imposed on such articles as are likewise produced at 
home.” Or if produced at home a revenue tariff would soon destroy 


ae Boe 


% their production. 


WHAT IS A PROTECTIVE TARIFF? 


What is a protective tariff? It is a tariff upon foreign imports so 


adjusted as to secure the necessary revenue, and judiciously imposed 
upon those foreign products the like of which are produced at home 
or the like of which we are capable of producing at home. [Ap- 
- plause.] Itimposes the duty upon the competing foreign product; it 
- makes it bear the burden or duty, and, as far as possible, luxuries only 
_ excepted, permits the non-competing foreign product to come in free 
of duty. Articles of common use, comfort, and necessity which we 
~ cannot produce here it sends to the people untaxed and free from cus- 
_tom-house exactions. [Applause.] Tea, coffee, spices, and drugs are 
‘such articles, and under our system are upon the free-list. It says 


to our foreign competitor, if you want to bring your merchandise 


here, your farm products here, your coal and iron ore, your wool, 


your salt, your pottery, your glass, your cottons and woolens, and 
sell alongside of our producers in our markets, we will make your 


product bear a duty; in effect, pay for the privilege of doing it. 
[Applause on the Republican side.]. Our kind of-a tariff makes the - 
- competing foreign article carry the burden, draw the load, supply 


90 WILLIAM MKINLEY, JR. 


the revenue; and in performing this essential office it encourages at 3 
the same time our own industries and protects our own people in — 
their chosen employments. [Applause.] That is the mission and — 


purpose of a protective tariff. That is what we mean to maintain, 


and any measure which will destroy it we shall firmly resist, and if. 


beaten on this floor we will appeal from your decision to the people, 


before whom parties and policies must at last be tried. [Applause.] 
_ We have free trade among ourselves throughout thirty-eight States — 
and the Territories and among sixty millions of people. Absolute — 
freedom of exchange within our own borders and among our own Citi- _ 


zens is the law of the Republic. Reasonable taxation and restraint 


upon those without is the dictate of enlightened patriotism and the ~ 
doctrine of the Republican party. [Applause on the Republican — 


side. | . 

Free trade in the United States is founded upon a commntenet of 
equalities and reciprocities. It is like the unrestrained freedom and 
reciprocal relations and obligations of a family. Here we are one 
country, one language, one allegiance, one standard of citizenship, 


one flag, one Constitution, one nation, one destiny. It is otherwise © 


with foreign nations, each a separate organism, a distinct and inde- 


pendent political society organized for its own, to protect its own, — 
and work out its own destiny. We deny to those foreign nation 


free trade with us upon equal terms with our own produce 


[Applause.] The foreign producer has no right or claim to equalivy ~ 
with our own. He is not amenable to our laws. There are resting — 
upon him none of the obligations of citizenship. He pays no taxes. — 
He performs no civil duties; is subject to no demands for military — 
‘service. He is exempt from State, county, and municipal obliga- — 
tions. He contributes nothing to the support, the progress, and — 
glory of the nation. Why should he enjoy unrestrained equal — 
privileges and profits in our markets with our producers, our labor, _ 


and our tax-payers? Let the gentleman who follows me answer. 


[Applause.] We put a burden upon his productions, we discrimi- j 
nate against his merchandise, because he is alien to us and our ~ 


‘interests, and we do it to protect our own, defend our own, preserve 


our own, who are always with us in adversity and prosperity, in 
sympathy and purpose, and, if necessary, in sacrifice. [Applause.] — 


That is the principle which governs us. I submit it is a patriotic — 


. 


and righteous one. In our own country, each citizen competing — 
with the other in free and unresentful rivalry, while with the rest — 
of the world all axe united and together in ee outside competi-_ 


tion as we would foreign interference. 


Free foreign trade admits the foreigner to equal apo icre vi - 


cy 
id 
; 


bs pusibesy 8 Ea oy Sag ek ei Bal a a aaa enn 
ee EMG, WILLIAM “WINERY. JR. 91 


- our own citizens. It invites the product of foreign cheap labor to 
_ this market in competition with the domestic product, representing 
- higher and better paid labor. It results in giving our money, our 
-manufactuyes, and our markets to other nations, to the injury of 
our labor, our tradespeople, and our farmers. Protection keeps 
- money, markets, and manufactures at home for the benefit of our 
own people. [Applause on the Republican side. ] 
It is scarcely werth while to more than state the proposition that 
- taxation upon a fore:gn competing product is more easily paid and 
less burdensome than eaxation upon the non-competing product. 
In the latter it is always added to the foreign cost, and therefore 
_ paid by the consumer, while in the former, where the duty is upon 
the competing product, it ix targely paid in the form of diminished 
profits to the foreign producer. [Applause.] It would be burden- 
_ some beyond endurance to collect our taxes from the products, pro- 
_ fessions, and labor of our own peopte. 


THE BILL WILL NOT REDUCE THE REVENUE. 


- Now, this is a bill ostensibly to reduce jhe revenue. It will not 
dé it. Take from this bill its internal-revenue features, its reduc- 
__tion of twenty-four and a half million dollars trom tobacco and from 

‘special licenses to dealers in spirits and tobacco, eliminate these 
Poca the. bill and you will not secure a dollar of reduction to the 

_ ‘“easury under its operation. Your $27,000,000 of proposed reduc- 
won by the free-list will be more than offset by the increased reve- 
~ nues which shall come from your lower duties; and I venture the 
_ prediction here to-day that if this bill should become a law, at the 
end of the fiscal year 1889 the dutiable list under it will carry more 
: money into the Treasury than is carried into the Treasury under 
the present law, because with every reduction of duties upon foreign 
"sports you Binnie and increase foreign importations; and to © 
_ the extent that you increase foreign importation, to that extent 

_ you increase the revenue. 


THE INCONSISTENCIES OF THE BILL. 


There is another singular thing in connection with this bill, and 

IT have nowhere seen attention called to it. Now I do not intend to 
examine the bill item by item. The minority of the Committee on 
_ Ways and Means (whose views, on behalf of my political associates 
I presented) went sufficiently over the bill in detail. But there are 
a few striking things in the bill which the country ought to under- _ 
stand. No one would have supposed from hearing this discussion 


ree 
Lae? J 
De 3 
Te sty 
a eh yore 
oN Awe Dail sad oa 
ae ee Pe a 7 | tA 4. 


but that the bill reduced duties all sie the kine. You Weulaiaeaaae 


have suspected, had you listened to the gentleman from Texas [Mr, — 


Mills], or the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Scott], or the gen. — 
tleman from Indiana [Mr. Bynum], or.other gentlemen of the Ways — 
and Means Committee, that this bill increased duties, would you? — 
How many men on the other side of the House know what is in this ; 


bill to-day? I would like to poll them. [Laughter. ] 
Now, here is a single item, steel billets. The present duty on 


steel billets is 45 per cent. ad valorem. In this bill it is increased to 


$11 per ton, which is equivalent to 68.33 per cent.—an advance of 45 


per cent. Do you know what is made out of these steel billets? — 
Wire fencing, which incloses the great fields of the West; and the — 
raw material is increased 45 per cent. by this bill; and if the prin- — 
ciple of the gentlemen who advocate the bill be true, that the duty — 


is added to the cost, every pound of wire fencing that goes to the 
West will be increased from one-quarter to one-half a cent a pound; — 


all this under a Democratic bill. What else is made out of steel bil- 


lets? Nails, which everybody uses, which enter into the every-day 


uses of the people. The duty upon nails is reduced 25 per cent., and — 
the raw material is increased 45 per cent. [Laughter.] As a friend 


near me suggests, when one end goes up the other goes down; and 
the latter, I trust, will be the fate of this bill. [Laughter.] 


Why, the duty on wire fencing is only 45 per cent. ad valo- . 


rem; yet the billet from which wire fencing is made must pay in — 
this pill 63 per cent. Here [illustrating] is a piece of wire rod drawn ~ 
from these steel billets, and which finally goes into fencing. Thatis — 


dutiable at 45 per cent. under this bill; and the steel from which it is 


made is dutiable at 63 per cent. What do you think of “raw — 


material for manufactures”? [Laughter.] No account is ee taken 


‘of the labor required to draw the rods. : 

But that is not all which is remarkable about this bill, this per ; 
bill which is based upon principle, it is said, which the President — 
stands behind and beneath, and which he insists shall be passed, ; 


whether or no, in this House, and for the passage of which he ig — 
dispensing official favors; for, as the Post, of this city, says, ‘‘there — 


is an Allentown for every Sowden, Y iLaughter and applause. ] 
What else? Here, for example, are cotton-ties; which present 


~ another queer freak in this bill. Everybody knows ‘what cotton-ties — 


are; they are hoop-iron cut into lengths just large enough to go — 


round a bale of cotton. Now, if the Southern cotton-planter wants — 
some of this hoop-iron with which to bale his cotton, he goes to the — 
custom-house at New York or Charleston and cuts off all he wants; — 
and he does not have to pay a cent of duty; but if the farmer-con- — 


ZS 
St 


" 7 ay 
ve 4" ta 
Wik” poe Se >a 
or ea 
ay re, oe 


- BS Thee aan ae an gee ese i ae Acrtiy > nies ? f 
“WILLIAM PKINLEY, SRT: — 93 


- stituent ef my friend who sits before me [Mr. Nelson], or your 
. farmer-constituent, wants some hoop-iron of precisely the width and 
; thickness, and goes to the custom-house to get it, the Government 
- . makes it pay one cent and a half of duty upon every pound he takes, 
_ __ while it lets the cotton-planter take his for nothing. If the Western 
_ farmer wants it for his bucket or his barrel or to go on his wagon- 
bed, or if the washerwoman wants it for her washtub, every one of 
these must pay a cent and a half a pound, under the philosophy of 
the gentlemen who framed this bill, while the cotton-planter. gets his 
. absolutely free of duty. 
_ Gentlemen, is that fair? I appeal to Southern men who sit before 
me; I appeal to Northern Democrats who sit around me; is that fair 
upon any principle of justice or fair play? Talk about sectionalism! 
You raise the question in your bill; you make a sectional issue which 
I deeply regret, and I am sure you must upon serious reflection. 
There are some other features in this bill which are a little singu- 
Jar. The proposed duty on white lead is 2 cents a pound, while 
orange mineral, which is made from white lead, is reduced to one 
cent and a half a pound. [Laughter.] That is another case of high 
duty upon raw material and low duty upon the finished product. 
,, Why, what in the world has this bill done for the people anyhow? 
What has it done for the farmer? It has taken the duty practically 
off of everything he grows; I will not stop to give the items. It 
_. makes free practically every product of the farm, the forest, and — 
; (mine. 
_~. It takes the duty off of wool. What does it give the grower in 
return? Does it give him anything free? Everything he buys is 
- dutiable.: The coat he wears, the hat that covers his head, his shoes, 
his stockings, his sugar, his rice, everything bears a duty and sub. 
' stantially everything he raises put on the free-list. 
i The duty on woolmust go. What has this Democratic party given 
_ the agriculturists in return for this slaughter of their interests? I 
have looked this bill up and down, and I will tell you what they have 
; a ae for the farmer. They have given him free sheep-dip. [Laughter 
-.. and applause.] Sheep-dip is made free and the duty is released. My 
Boe eecished friend from Virginia [Mr. LEE], who honors me with 
“his presence here, knows what this article is. It is a preparation 
~ which is used on Shep. It is made up largely of the stems of tobacco. 
It has got a little sulphur in it. I believe; it has got a little lime in it. 
They put that on the free-list, and that is all they do for the farmer. 
~ {Laughter. ] : 
_--«~*Mr. Hopxrns, of Illinois. What good is that to the farmer after~ 
they have destroyed his flocks? 


To es ee 


94 | WILLIAM MKINLEY. JR. 


Mr. McKINLEY. Nowe. They leave the shears he Bis his wool . 
with at 45 per cent. ad valorem. They make his wool free and make — 


the farmer pay 45 per cent. for the shears with which he clips his 
wool, [Laughter.] ' 
But that is not all. The bell, the sheep bell—if my friend from 


Massachusetts [Mr. RussELL] is here, if that golden-shod shepherd ~ 


from Worcester is here [laughter and applause], he will understand. 


It is the bell that is putaround the neck of the sheep to admonish the t 


shepherd of the whereabouts of the wandering flock under his charge. 


I am told the gentleman has got on the outside. I learn now he is 


here in his seat; Iam glad to see him. He knows what I am talking 
about. [Laughter. ] 

They have left them dutiable at 45 per cent. ad valorem. Why, 
the sheep even will be ashamed of you, gentlemen. [Laughter.] 


Tin plates are made free. Whatare tin plates made of? Ninety- 


seven and a half per cent. are sheet-iron or sheet-steel; 24 per cent. 
tin. ‘Tin plates are made free. Sheet-iron, sheet-steel are dutiable 
at 2 cents a pound. Now, I shall not tax you further with the details 
of the bill. I might spend hours in pointing out like inconsistencies. 
I will leave their further discussion for the five-minute debate. I only 
give these samples so that my honorable and learned friend from 


_ Kentucky [Mr. BKECKINRIDGE] who replies to me, shall take them up 
and explain the principle on which these rates are fixed and these — 


-any of our statutes; but if a man is engaged in violating the revenue 


duties levied. 


There is another thing which [ wish to call attention to i 


in connection with this bill, and that is the internal-revenue 
part of it. It seems to have escaped attention. Now, so far as the 
abolition of the tax on tobacco is concerned we are all inaccord; but 


this new feature of the bill provides for the repeal of the law which ; 


authorizes the destruction of illicit stills when found in unlawful use. 


Under the present law if you find a man engaged in unlawful distill- 


ing, not having paid the tax or secured the license, the officer is au- 
thorized to go and destroy the whole outfit. This bill repeals that 


section of the law and provides that the still shall neither be mutilated 


nor destroyed, but preserved presumably for future violations of the 


law. [Laughter and applause. ] 


And in this bill further provision is made that in case a man fe 


arrested for illicit distilling, the judge is charged especially with the 
duty of looking well to his comfort and to his well-being while he 
isin the custody of the officials of the law. [Laughter on the Re- 
publican side. ] 


That provision does not apply to any other class of criminals under _ 


pe aie as Perea tea eI GR I Ais aN 7 


Pe WInLIAM WERINTDY, J OB 


laws he must be tenderly fooled after by the judge, who is directed 
to see that he is in every way made comfortable while serving out 
his sentence in prison. [Renewed laughter on the Republican side. ] 


THE VICIOUS AD VALOREM SYSTEM INTRODUCED IN BILL. 


Now there is one leading feature of this bill, which is not 
by any means the most objectionable feature, but which, if 


: it stood alone, ought to defeat this entire measure; and that is 


the introduction of the ad valorem system of assessment to 


_ take the place of the specific system now generally in force. You all 
_ know the difference between the ad valorem system and the specific 
~ mode of levying duties. One is based upon value, the other upon 
quantity. One is based upon the foreign value, difficult of ascer- 
_tainments, resting in the judgment of experts, all the time offering a 
bribe to Wadervaluation: the other rests upon quantity, fixed and 


well known the world over, always determinable and always uni- 


form. The one is assessed by the yard-stick, the ton, and the pound- 
weight of commerce, and the other is assessed by the foreign value 
_ fixed by the foreign importer or his agent in New York or else- 


where; fixed by the producer, fixed by anybody at any price to es- 
cape the payment of full duties. Why, the valuation under the ad 


: -yalorem system is not even uniform throughout the United States. 


My friend from Massachusetts [Mr. Morse], who listens to me now, 


knows that the valuations fixed upon imported goods at.the port of 


Boston are often different from the valuations fixed on the same 
class of goods, costing the same, arriving in New York, Philadelphia, 


_ San Francisco, or Charleston. 


So we do not have and can not have a uniform value, for the 


value is subject always to the cupidity or dishonesty of the foreign 
' importer or producer. It is a system that has been condemned 
by all the leading nations of the world. There is not a leading na- 


tion that adheres to any considerable extent to the ad valorem rates 


a of duty upon articles imported into its borders; and England has 


abandoned all ad valorem duties except one, for the very reason 


that there can be no honest administration of the revenue laws so 


long as the value is fixed thousands of miles away from the point of 
production and impossible of verification at home. Henry Clay said 
fifty years ago: 


Let me fix the value of the foreign merchandise, and I donot care what 
your duty is. 


Mr. Secretary Manning in his very able report made to the last 
Congress, has gone over the entire question, and he publishes in a 


; 


“WILLIAM A EINEBY, TR. 


volume the opinions of the experts of the Treasury, the collectors, 
the naval officers, the special agents of the Department, all of them 
declaring that there is nothing left for the American Government to 
do but to abolish the ad valorem system and adopt the specific in 
the interest of the honest collection of the revenue and for the safety 
and security of reputable merchants. And the Secretary himself 
says, in language too strong and plain to be misunderstood, thatitis ~ 
the duty of Congress to abandon the ad valorem and establish spec- 
ific duties. 

I give below these opinions. 

Naval officer Burt, of New York, says: 


I have long been convinced that a change from ad valorem to specific rates 
would not only be a benefit to the revenues, but would go far to relieve their 
administration from the friction and inevitable injustice that have made it in a 
measure odious. I might give here a résumé of my reasons for this opinion, as 
_ frequently expressed officially hitherto, but I presume the Department is fully 
apprised of all the arguments adduced on either side. 1 will therefore simply 
say that the ad valorem system is theoretically the perfect system, and that this 
has engaged its support by those who have only had opportunity to view it as 
an abstract proposition. This prejudice in its favor must surely give way be- 
fore the overwhelming evidences that in practice, particularly with high rates, 
it breeds injustice, contention, and commercial obstructions that are almost in- 
tolerable. 


James D. Power, a special agent of the Treasury, in a report 1o 
the same Secretary, says: 


Ad valorem rates of duty afford temptations end opportunities for fraud — 
which can not be guarded against, even by the most rigid rules and vigilant 
watchfulness. The assessment of values under this system is based upon ex- 
pert knowledge of values, the most uncertain and arbitrary method that could — 
be devised. Under the ad valorem system fraud has prospered and de- 
moralized the importing trade, which has passed from the hands of American 
citizens into the control of men who have taken advantage of our high import 
duties to enrich themselves at the expense of the revenue and the ruined trade 
of American wholesale firms. Fraud of this nature is difficult to detect and 
more difficult still to establish. In the absence of documentary proof it re- 
solves itself into a mere difference of opinion between experts; and the owner 
of the suspected goods can at all times procure experts who will maintain the 
correctness of his invoice prices, or he may select an easier and more convinc- — 
ing and efficacious line of defense by procuring affidavits from his buyer or part- — 
ner abroad to the effect that the invoice cost was the actual price paid forthe 
goods. 


ie 


. } ’ 
I Bien aly eye Eee ey [ON Pha me ee 


Messrs. L. G. Martin and A. K. Tingle, special agents, make the mek 4 
following statement to the Secretary ; 


ch ht eT aa ye rete Ee ae ay TA aie art ae I NAT ae a tod ace A A og) meal ate ON en) 
Nak ale Saget se a eer S ee Li Se SAE iy Me mii 
Reet x r 


ee Akers 


WILLIAM MKINLEY. JR. ~ pend: 


There can be no doubt that a change from ad valorem to specific rates 
would help to diminish the tendency to corrupt action and loss to the revenue 
by the incompetency or indifference of appraisers. The application of specific 
rates to all textile fabtics would undoubtedly be a work of great difficulty, 


__ particularly as to woolen goods, but it is believed that a schedule can be pre- 


pared by the skilled officers in the appraiser’s department, with the aid of 
manufacturers and merchants, which would be satisfactory to all interested, 
except those who are profiting by the present system of undervaluation. 


The late Secretary Manning sums up the objections to ad valorem 
rates, and I beg to quote his language. He exposes the vice of the 
system which this bill seeks to engraft upon our legislation: 


Whatever successful contrivances are in operation to-day to evade the rev- 
enue by false invoices, or by undervaluations, or by any other means, under 
an ad velorem system, will not cease even if the ad valorem rates shall have 
been largely reduced. They are incontestably, they are even notoriously in- 
herent in that system. 

One advantage, and perhaps the chief advantage of a specific over an ad 
’ valorem system is in the fact that, under the former, duties are levied by a 

positive test, which can be applied by our officers while the merchandise is in 
possession of the Government, and according to a standard which is altogether 
‘national and domestic. That would be partially true of an ad valorem system 


- 'Jevied upon ‘“home value;” but there are constitutional impediments in the 


way of such a system which appear to be insuperable. But under an ad 
valorem system, the facts to which the ad valorem rate is to be applied must be 
gathered in places many thousand miles away, and under circumstances most 
unfavorable to the administration of justice. One hears it often said that if 
our ad valorem rates did not exceed 25 or 80 per cent. undervaluation and temp- 
tation to undervaluation would disappear; but the records of this Department 
for the years 1817, 1840, and 1857 do not uphold that conclusion. 


This one feature of the bill ought to be enough to insure its defeat, 


ae and if the party associates of the late Secretary had given heed to his 


geen 


sound utterances this vicious mode of assessment would have no place 

inthe bill. Instead of simplifying the collection of the revenues as 
the title of the bill declares, it will increase the difficulties now ex- 
perienced, encourage fraudulent invoices, promote undervaluation, 
impair the revenue, and do incalculable injury to honest importers 
and merchants, 


_ Inow come to consider the general effect of the protective system | 
upon our people and their employments. There is no conflict of in- 
terests and should be none between the several classes of producerg 


THE GENERAL EFFECT OF PROTECTION. smatnncrony 


98 “WILLIAM iyi pes Piece 


- 


and the consumers in the United States. Their interests are one, 
interrelated and interdependent. That which benefits one benefits 


all; one man’s work has relation with every other man’s work in the ~ 


same community; each is an essential part of the grand result to be 
attained; and that statesmanship which would seek to array the one 
against the other for any purpose is narrow, unworthy, and unpatri- 
otic. The President’s message is unhappily in that direction. The 
discussion had on this floor has taken that turn. Both have been 
calculated to create antagonisms where none existed. 


The farmer, the manufacturer, the laborer, the tradesman, and ~ 


the producer and the consumer all have a common interest in the 
maintenance of a protective tariff. Allare alike and equally favored 
by the system which you seek to overthrow. It isa nationalsystem, 
broad and universal in its application; if otherwise it should be aban- 


doned. It cannot be invoked for one section or one interest to the - 


exclusion of others. It must be general in its application within the 
contemplation of the principle upon which the system is founded. 
We have been living under it for twenty-seven continuous years, 
and it can be asserted with confidence that no country in the world 
has achieved such industrial advancement, and such marvelous 
progress in arts, science, and civilization as ours. Tested by its re- 
sults, it has surpassed all other revenue systems, 

From 1789 to 1888, a period of ninety-nine years, there have been 
forty-seven years when a Democratic revenue tariff policy has pre- 
vailed, and fifty-two years under the protective policy, and it isa 
noteworthy fact that the most progressive and prosperous periods 
of our history in every department of human effort and material 
development were during the fifty-two years when the protective 
party was in control and protective tariffs were maintained; and 
the most disastrous years—years of want and wretchednegs, ruin 
and retrogression, eventuating in insufficient revenues and shattered 
credits, individual and national—were during the free-trade or 
revenue-tariff eras of our history. No man living who passed 
through any of the latter periods but would dread their return, and 
would flee from them as he would escape from fire and pestilence; 
and I believe the party which promotes their return will merit and 
receive popular condemnation. What is the trouble with our pres- 
ent condition? No country can point to greater prosperity or more 
- enduring evidences of substantial progress among all the people. 


Too much money is being collected, it is said. We say stop it; not — 


by indiscriminate and vicious legislation, but by simple business 
methods. Do it on simple, practical lines and we will help you. 
Buy up the bonds, objectionable as it may be, and pay the nation’s 


im 


% oe et er er cots Etta tea ee LS MAE GMD a Bch eM Se ote Welt 
Yay ane og ci FP mae VP ee ace Ae ane Has EATEN Sapte gy Me eras Ney 


é WILLIAM M‘KINLEY, JR. 99 


debts, if you cannot reduce taxation. You could have done this 
long ago. Nobody is chargeable for the failure and delay but your > 
own Administration. 
Who is objecting to our protective system? From what quarter 
does the complaint come? Not from the enterprising American 
citizen; not from the manufacturer; not from the laborer, whose 
wages it improves; not from the consumer, for he is fully satisfied, 
because under it he buys a cheaper and a better product than he did 
~- under the other system; not from the farmer, for he finds among 
the employés of the protected industries his best and most reliable 
customers; not from the merchant or the tradesman, for every hive 
of industry increases the number of his customers and enlarges the 
a volume of his trade. Few, indeed, have been the petitions presented. 
to this House” asking for. any yeiction of duties upon imports. 
None, that I have seen or heard of, and I have watched with the 
deepest interest the number and character of these petitions that I 
might gather from them the drift of public sentiment—I say I have 
geen none asking for the passage of this bill, or for any such depart- 
ure from the fiscal policy of the Government so long recognized and 
followed, while against this legislation there has been no limit to 
petitions, memorials, prayers, and protests, from producer and con- 
sumer alike. 


NO PUBLIC DEMAND FOR SUCH A MEASURE, 


This measure is not called for by the people: it is not an American 
measure—it is inspired by importers and foreign producers, most of 
__. them aliens, who want to diminish our trade and increase their own; 
who want to decrease our prosperity and augment theirs, and who 

~ have no interest in this country except what they can make out of 
it. To this is added the influence of the professors in some of our 
institutions of learning, who teach the science contained in books 
end not that of practical business. I would rather have my political 
economy founded upon the every-day experience of the puddler or 
the potter than the learning of the professor, the farmer and factory 
hand than the college faculty. Then there is another class who want 
protective tariffs overthrown. They are the men of independent 
wealth, with settled and steady incomes, who want everything 
cheap but currency; the value of everything clipped but coin—cheap 
labor but dear money. These are the elements which are arrayed 


ag. ainst us. a aK 


a ‘Men whose capital is invested in productive enterprises, who take 


the risks of business, men who expend their capital and energy in 


eas ae at ee Re Se erp Tiare oh ae 


100 WILLIAM MKINLEY. JR. 


ne Cue So! a OPS, a sae 
ST a ie es wae ee 


the development of our resources, they are in favor of the mainté- 
nance of the protective system. The farmer, the rice-grower, the 
iminer, the vast army of wage-earners from one end of the country — 

to the other, the chief producers of wealth, men whose capital is 
their brain and muscle, who aspire to better their condition and 
elevate themselves and their fellows; the young man whose future © 

is yet before him, and which he must carve out with his hand and 
head, who is without the aid of fortune or of a long ancestral line,— 

_ these are our steadfast allies in this great contest for the preserva- 
tion of the American system. Experience and results in our own 
country are our best advisers, and they vindicate beyond the possi- 
bility of dispute the worth and wisdom of the system. . A 

What country can show such a trade as ours, such commerce, such 

immense transportation lines, such a volume of exchanges, and such 
marvelous production from the raw material to the finished product. 

‘Its balance-sheet is without a parallel in the world’s history—richest 

in agriculture, greatest in its domestic trade and traffic, and leading 

in manufactures any nation in HKurope. Why abandon a policy 
which can point to such achievements and whose trophies are to be 
seen on every hand! The internal commerce of the United States is 
greater than the entire foreign commerce of Great Britain, France, 
Germany, Russia, Holland, Belgium, and Austria-Hungary. Why, 

a single railroad system in this country (that of the Pennsylvania 
Railroad Company) carries more tonnage and traffic in a single year — 
than all the merchant ships of Great Britain. The whole of Europe 

has not built as many miles of railroad as this country has during 
some recent years, and in 1880 the whole known world did not lay 

as many miles of track as were laid acrossthis country. Great Brit- 
ain’s foreign commerce equals about one-sixth of our domestic com- / 
merce. Can we do better under any other fiscal policy? We say /— 
not. Wise statesmanship commands us, therefore, to let well noua j 


‘~._ alone. 


Sir Edward Sullivan, in a recent article in the London Post, makes 
these suggestive comparisons, which I beg every gentleman to hear - 


e 


Under free trade the masses must get poorer, because they get less employ- __ 
ment. A well-known statistical work gives a comparison of the material 
progress of France under protection and England under free trade. If there 
is any truth in figures it ought to startle us from our free-trade dream. 

The comparison is based on the returns of legacy duty: 

In 1826 England was 10s. a head richer than France. 

_In 1850 England was 19s. a head richer than France. 
In 1877 England was 5s. a head poorer than France « 


WILLIAM M‘KINLEY, JR. : LOL 


France has 57 per cent. of her land under tillage, and it is increasing every 
year. 
The United Kingdont has 30 per cent. of land under tillage, and it is dimin- 
_ ishing every year, but the population of England increases much more rapidly 
than the population of France. 

The commerce of England has increased 21 per cent. in ten years. 

The commerce of France has increased 39 per cent. in ten years. 

The commerce of the United States has increased 68 per cent. in ten years. 

‘Fhe commerce of the world has increased 26 per cent. in ten years. 

So much for the blasting effect of free trade. 


In Germany, so long ago as the 14th of May, 1882, Bismarck, in a 
speech before the German Reichstag, paid to the Republican tariff 
- high eulogy. He said: 


The success of the United States in material development is the most illus- 
trious of modern time. The American nation has not only successfully borne 
and suppressed the most gigantic and expensive war of all history, but imme- 

diately afterward disbanded its Army, found employment for all its soldiers 
and marines, paid off most of its debt, given labor and homes to all the unem- 
ployed of Europe as fast as they could arrive within its territory, and still by 
a, system of taxation so indirect as not to be perceived, much less felt. Be- 
cause it is my deliberate judgment that the prosperity of America is mainly 
due to its system of protective laws, I urge that Germany has now reached 
that point where it is necessary to imitate the tariff system of the United 
States. 


a 


‘You may try protection by any test you will. You may try it 


not only by the condition of the individual citizen and his happiness 


and prosperity and the aggregate prosperity of the nation, but try it 
__ by the progress which has been made in invention and scientific de- 
velopment; try it by any standard you may raise, the protective 
_ system shows by its results that it surpasses any other. You can 
match it with no other. 
Go to the Patent Office and examine the evidences furnished from 
that great register of the products of American genius. Take the 
States which have stood by the protective system, which have 
believed in it, which have been built up under it, and contrast them 
with the States whose Representatives have stood in unyielding oppo- 
sition to the system on this floor. See what result you get. Take 
Connecticut, a little State, but a manufacturing one. In the year 
1887 there were 788 patents granted to the inhabitants of that State, 
1 for every 790 of its inhabitants, while for Arkansas the number of 
patents granted was 65, 1 for every 12,346. Take Massachusetts: In 
1887 there were 1,875 patents granted to the people of that State, 1 


102 WILLIAM M‘KINLEY, JR. 


to every 950 of her population, while to Kentucky there were 245 


patents granted, or 1 to every 6,729 of her population. Take Illinois: 
1,595 patents were granted to her people, 1 to every 1,929 of her pop- 
ulation, while for Georgia there were 130, or 1 in every 11,862 of 
her population. Here is the list: 


Taken from the Commissioner’s report, for the year 1887. 


ne to 
STATES. Patents. eee 
(Inhabitant.) 

HPT OO LACIE So Ue ola Siihclah ya a 8 6 Sa piace nn Siu are nig ele ins Gugiasy tere Olas alata mdi oa eel 788 700 
PA VICATIRRIS ON bisiste ds ctataitte badd ieaidht oidiciols Siem a Om ate dee Blea atefets Se Rs leit oleh ate Mees 65 12,346 
HVS SEU TLUES GUS tacts citi ic cues cies, Sua erate Sasi od alate a eet eet al ieiaearais elt nate ant 1,875 950 
AUFAOIS Hoes sui ieee ss BORON ta aid eo rae he Sank eter ade Se re eee ene Ar. 1,595 1,929 
PRETO 2 Mia Note oats = ara sett cine s Sglniit ca tee une eelneinee EC ne sighs 245 6,729. 
MH OOV aor acta nisi picts wins Wicks =e aiessi-e/ale D Ba fesahe tte eeaate tic Sand Renee ae Pag. 130 11,862 
DI GW IOV BOV Gy ore ve ifois si). aces ae Cs Si aeleh win wh paeobipn ia Sea eien T prt me Busi alae 988 4,144 
Louisiana 112 8,392 
New York 4,047 1 255e- 
Mississippi 45 25,146 

TA CIEL IER Mat Bul ty @ bakin Sayre Wie higy eb e dese 1,477 2,165 
SNe ei T: ODES os wo hse antes recs cite tahle poole onalaig SS abe ore cetlate lasb wsiai opel reins arp carte 66 21.208 
POS VIN ATU 2 202555 sa Slee pe wie e Mac aie Gees pine Shin's wie shee aw SMart ee se ish 2,109 2,030 
OULOTIT OA OLLI «(Sie ord F's cisinxs’ sol cue Beale soe wimse Cis ieieloins pioke ew ial nator See) Sibtate Te ferebete metals 52 19,145 
POG SHISIANG eine rceiely ui o's favs oa v5 erates eral sok TEAS nace henele rue hee peat aler eee eee 224 1,234 
EPOMISESSOOLS Fite, ce ieis.p wes lojaie d Umi iele aise Oicla ain ain sie emterp th jae caplvse spielen aes 6 421 12,746 
MESIAL ONIN ices tra Sie B classe Sint acon wiehiwil walsse'a 0 0 0l8 bie phone doris Ricvete sei piete io acare the atae tarde 112 2,966 
VA IRE AE tare oat Sig cin eulonie Wish ete cokes Vola wm atarelnce ny lagi fe slttle aie hav ale haere neem 132 11,458 
MENTE tatoo Si eo iar iel oils aia iosess is See abecoaety mime Steele’ ural oe tole eicaes tatecee eat 505 1,712 
ERE ates Sale aie siamese c's Chia tdin elas pian irae Aaa se Mts alee ee wee A Eanes ee 265 6,006 


These figures need no comment; they point their own moral; 


they enforce their own lesson. They demonstrate better than any 


argument that I can make that invention and progress and the 
general diffusion of knowledge follow manufacturing and industrial 
enterprises. [Applause. ] 


A HOME MARKET. 


The establishment of a furnace or factory or mill in any neigh- 
borhood has the effect at once to enhancé the value of all property 
and all values for miles surrounding it. They produce increased 
activity. The farmer has a better and a nearer market for his prod- 


ucts. The merchant, the butcher, the grocer, have an increased 


trade. The carpenter is in greater demand; he is called upon to 
build more houses. Every branch of trade, every avenue of labor, 
will feel almost immediately the energizing influence of a new in- 
dustry. The truck farm is in demand; the perishable products, the 
fruits, the vegetables, which in many cases will not bear exporta- 
tion and which a foreign market is too distant to be available, find a 
constant and ready demand at good paying prices. 


ay 


WILLIAM MKINLEY, JR. 103 


What the agriculturist of this country wants more than anything 
else, after he has gathered his crop, are consumers, consumers at 
home, men who do not produce what they eat, who must purchase 
all they consume: men who are engaged in manufacturing, in min- 
ing, in cotton-spinning, in the potteries, and in the thousands of pro- 


- ductive industries which command all their time and energy, and 


whose employments do not permit of their producing their own food. 
- The American agriculturist further wants these consumers near 
and convenient to his field of supply. Cheap as inland transporta- 


tion is, every mile saved is money made. Every manufacturing 


establishment in the United States, wherever situated, is of priceless 
value to the farmers of the country. The six manufacturing States 
of New England aptly Ulustrate the great value of a home market 
to the Western farmer. These States have reached the highest per- 
fection in skill and manufactures. They do not raise from their 
own soil, with the exceptions of hay and potatoes, but a small frac- 
tion of what their inhabitants require and consume; they could not 
from their own fields and granaries feed the population which they 


had in 1830, much less their present population. The most intense 


revenue-reformer, the most unenlightened Democrat, will have to 
confess that New England is indebted in large part for her splendid 


development to the protective system. Now, has her prosperity and 
progress been secured at the sacrifice of other interests and other 


sections? I answer no, but has brought, as I believe I shall be able 
to show, a positive blessing to all of our 60,000,000 of people. 
In 1880 the population of these six States was over 4,000,000. The 


food products required by their people, the very necessities of their 


daily life in a large measure, came from other States and remote sec- 


tions of the Union. They raised in 1880 but one-quarter of 1 per cent. 
of the total wheat production of the United States. They raised in 
- the same year but one-half of 1 per cent. of the total crop of Indian 


corn, 2} per cent. of the oats, 12 per cent. of the hay, and 18 per cent. 
of the potatoes which were produced in the United States. What 
did they consume? What did they buy of the Western farmer? 
Fifty millions of dollars’ worth of meat were consumed by their in- 
dustrial people in a single year. The extent of their needs is strik- 
ingly shown by the fact (obtained from the accounts of Commis- 
sioner Fink) that during the year 1884 ‘‘the trunk lines” brought 
into New England no less than 470,000 tons of flour and 950,000 tons. 


’ of grain. At 200 pounds to the barrel of flour, this is an importa- 


tion of 4,'700,000 barrels, or one and one-fifth, nearly, for each inhab- . 


itant. During the same year there were exported from Boston and 
Portland, the only points in New England from which breadstufis 


104 WILLIAM MKINLEY. JR. 


are sent abroad, 2,100,000 barrels of flour, leaving for consumption | c 


within these States 2,600,000 barrels. These figures take no account 
of the large trade by water from New York. I am informed that 
a large part of the flour consumed in Connecticut, Rhode Island, 
and Southern Massachusetts is received in this way, but no reliable 
statistics are available. It is reasonable, however, to suppose, and 
this comes to me from what I deem good authority, that the 


amount thus received and consumed offsets a large portion of the 


foreign exports to which I have referred. 

Of the grain received during the same year rather less than 
400,000 tons were exported, leaving for New England consumption 
550,000 tons, for all of which these States were the customers of 
the West in addition to the amount grown upon their own soil. 
In addition to this, New England consumed, in 1886-’87, in her fac- 
tories nearly one-fourth of the entire cotton crop of the country. 
More than this, she used in her woolen mills in 1880 fully one-half 
of the entire wool clip of the United States, and during the year 
1886 she consumed more than one-sixth of the entire anthracite-coal 
production of the country and 54 per cent. of the bituminous-coal 
production, and every pound of both came from the Middle and 
Southern States. 

Is not New England (I appeal to the gentlemen of the other side, 
I appeal to the farmers of the country) worth preserving? Is not the 
industrial system which makes such a community of consumers for 
agricultural products possible worth maintaining? Does not she fur- 
nish you a market worth fostering? Does not she give you a trade 


and an exchange of products worth your while to guard with the © 


most considerate care? And does not her condition indicate the 


wisdom of the policy we advocate? Is not her market better for. 


you than a foreign one? Is not New England a better customer for 
you, more reliable, more easily reached, more stable, than Old Eng- 
land? [Applause on the Republican side.] Is not Boston a better 
consumer for the people of the United States than London, New 
York than Liverpool, Pittsburgh than Manchester, Cincinnati than 
Birmingham? [Applause on the Republican side. ] 

New England buys of you for all her wants; Old England takes 


not a pound or a bushel from you except what she must have and — 


cannot get elsewhere. 

Now, let us contrast this home market of New England with the 
foreign market of Old England. In 1880 New England consumed 
540,000,000 pounds of cotton, at 11.61 a pound, which in value then 
amounted to $62,695,000, 20 per cent.” greater than the per capita 


value of all our domestic exports to the United Kingdom, and this 


ee Pi Ped 4 ‘ 
Maar me Fate ae Te PES Se Le Le a le. Wee es Meets 


eae eve ene a ia aga ie Pan ae ae 


WILLIAM MKINLEY. TR. ies 183) 


was only New England’s eaaibution to the Southern producers of 


cotton. She sends at least $70,000,000 to the West and Northwest 
for her food supplies. She sends to the wool-growers of the Middle, 


_. Western, and Pacific States $40,000,000 annually for their fleeces. I 


repeat, is not this market worth preserving, ay, cherishing, and 


does it not make us long to have New England thrift, New England 


enterprise, and New England politics more generally distributed 


‘throughout all sections of the country? [Applause on the Republican 


side. | 

You can destroy this valuable home market by such legislation 
as is proposed in this bill; you can diminish this demand for food, 
for cotton, for wool, for flax, and hemp produced in other sections 


of the country by following the delusive theories of our friends on 


the other side of the House; you can diminish the capacity of the 
operatives to buy of you by diminishing their wages; you can drive 
them from the cotton and woolen factories to the farms; they will 
then drift to the West and Northwest, not to engage in manufacture, 
but in a great. measure to become tillers of the soil, and instead of 
being as they are now, and as they will be under a proper tariff 


system, your comsumers, they become your competitors. They go 


from the ranks of consumers to the ranks of producers; diminish 


the consumers and increase the producers. The foreign market for 


agricultural products is one of the delusions of free trade. If it ever 


had any real substance as against a good home market that has long 


 gince disappeared. 


The chairman of the Ways and Means Committee says to the 


‘Western farmer, ‘‘Let New England go. Pass her by and go to Old 


' England.” Well, that is about as practical as the Democratic party 
ordinarily is. [Laughter on the Republican side.] 


Mr. Dunn, a prominent member of this House and chairman of 
one of its lending committees, and I remember to have heard him 


ES gay what I now read from the RECORD: 


_ The wheat producer of the Northwest is standing face to face with the 
wheat producer of India. A few years ago India shipped 40,000 bushels of 


| wheat. Last year (1885) she put into the market 40,000,000 bushels. Can you 


protect the Northwest farmer against that labor? India can put wheat down 
in the markets of consumption in Europe cheaper than we can transport it from 
the fields of production to the markets of consumption; that is to say, India 
can produce and market her wheat in Europe for what it costs the farmer of 
the Northwest to transport his to the market of consumption, without allowing 


- him for the cost of production. In other words, the transportation of wheat 
costs the American farmer as much as both transportation and production cost 
~~ the India farmer. 


ee Nie OER Te Tt Qo kg eerne, Bt Oh ato Frenne, PCa) ne ae Rare RP Nee Stas ob ern Sak aed 1) 
ies Be Aca ORC iC oteahiMinle Got Ata ig ame Ate ite cs Yel ia gS ed (hh Ste Sgn 
eae ay : 0 oe me er od eee eae See ty a. Laem > 


4% 


106 WILLIAM M‘KINLEY, JR. 


In the face of a statement like this, from such high Democratic 
authority, how, I ask, is the wheat of the American farmer to reach 
the European market with any profit to our producers? And yet it 
is to this kind of competition the chairman of the Ways and Means 
Committee invites the American farmer. Do the farmers want 
such a market with such a competition? What their answer will —_ 
be no man can doubt. They reject with indignation and scorn the ; 
chairman’s moriation. [Applause.] The home market is the best, 
besides being the safest. It has got the most money to spend,and 
spends the most. It consumes the most; it is therefore the most B 
profitable. . . 

The masses of our people live better than any people in the world. 
Great Britain only buys our food products when she has not enough 
of her own and can reach no other supply. This market, therefore, 
is fitful and fluctuating, and cannot be relied upon as we can rely 
upon our own consumers. The foreign market under a revenue 
for agricultural products has not been encouraging in our own expe- 
rience in the past. It promises less under such a system in the 

_ future. : 


INCREASED IMPORTATIONS THE PURPOSE OF THE BILL. 


The chairman of the committee in opening this debate boldly an- 
nounced that we must increase foreign importations to secure 
national prosperity. How much do the gentleman and the party 
with which he is associated desire to increase importations? Are 
they not large enough already ? Are they not now crowding our 
producers and diminishing their annual productions? Aretheynot 
already making labor restless, filling it with apprehension and un- 
certainty as to the future? Is this country to be the dumping 
ground of foreign products ? During the last fiscal year over $233,- 
000,000 in value of foreign merchandise was imported into the!United 
States free of duty, and over $450,000,000 additional was imported 
which paid a duty. Is this not enough? Do the iron and steel 

- workers want further importations in their line, representing cheap 
labor, to compete with the product of their labor? Over $50,000,000 
in value of iron and steel manufactures was imported last’year, every 
dollar of which represented foreign capital and foreign labor, which —__ 
might well have been produced at home. Every ton could have , 
been made here, and American hands were waiting to make it. oe 

How much labor do you suppose was represented by the $50,000,- 
000 worth of iron and steel that came into this country last year? 
ft would have taken 1,740 puddlers and helpers, working every day 

* ee 


a mer ce 


for 300 days in the year, to have produced the scrap-iron that came 

from Europe last year. It would have taken 2,500 men 300 days to 

have produced the bar and structural iron, and steel billets, and 

_ slabs, and ingots which were imported into the United States last 

year. It would have taken 300 men 300 days, besides those engaged 

in preparing the raw material, to have produced the plates and 

sheets, the corrugated iron, and the steel in various forms imported 

last year. It would have taken 3,700 men 300 days to have made 

the wire rods and the nails and the screws and wire in various 

shapes which were imported into the United States last year. It 

would have taken 800 men 300 days to have made the washers, and 

the bolts, and the fish-plates, and railway-plates, the steel tire, 

_ _ hinge-iron, and tubes of steel which were imported into this country 

last year. It would have taken 500 men 300 days to have made the 

iron and steel rails which were brought into the United States from 

abroad last year. It would have taken 24,000 men to manufacture 

the tin-plate imported last year. Summing up these figures, 33,540 

- men, working for 300 days, would have been required to produce the 

- $50,000,000 worth of iron and steel which we imported last year. Do 

you want that volume increased ? Ten million sixty-two thousand 

-is the aggregate number of days’ work that were taken from Ameri- 

- ttean workingmen, every day’s work of which they could have per- 

formed, and were waiting ready to perform. [Applause.] Including - 

all branches of labor required to manufacture the fifty millions of 

imported iron and steel and the manufacture thereof, taking into 

account the labor employed in the mining, transportation, and ma- 

nipulation of the raw materials, and it would employ nearly, if not 
quite, one hundred thousand men. 

IT do not know what you think about it ; but I would not permit 

-. .asingle ton of steel to come into the United States if our own labor 

could make it. [Applause.] Let American labor, as far as practi- 

cable, manufacture American products. [Applause.] And if you 

do not like it, you know what you can do. [Laughter.] This Gov- 

ernment is made for Americans, native-born and naturalized ; and 

every pound, every bushel, every ton, every yard of foreign product 

that comes into this country to compete with ours deprives American 

labor of what justly belongs to it. 

Do the farmers want increased importations of agricultural pro- 

ducts? Of barley alone there were $6,152,000 of value imported last 

- year, and of vegetables a value of $2,276,000. The total imports of 

the products of agriculture for the year 1887 free and dutiable were 

‘in value $197,308,240. Of this sum $46,678,443 was admitted free of 

_ duty and the remainder paid a duty. Do the agriculturists want ths 


gut ie bata hiatatcen ata aflciadegs rts tae Py aN ROE, hae See MYR Cte es Boobs te one Chea a 


WILLIAM MKINERY, TR re AE 


ee 


108 WILLIAM “MKINLEY. TR. 


Reha Sea tee eR a on Ee OR lity co cl A sho) eae oes ot eee bat. ~ 


duties all removed and their products driven from this market? 
Seven million three hundred thousand dollars’ worth of foreign glass 


came into this country last year. Do the glass-blowers want this — 


volume increased? Five million five hundred and forty-five thou- 


sand dollars’ worth of pottery of foreign make entered our market? / 
last year. Do the potters want this vast sum augmented? Will the | 
wool-growers who were compelled to compete with $16.000,000 worth | 
of foreign wool last year relish the prospect of having their product 


further displaced next year; and the labor engaged in woolen manu- 
factories in this country, are they anxious that the $44,000,000 worth 
of woolen goods imported in 1887 in competition with the products 


of their labor shall be multiplied in 1889? All these importations — 


will be greatly increased if this bill shall become a law. Every in- 


voice of foreign goods which comes here the like of which we can 


make crowds out just so much American labor. Is there to be no 
limit to this foreign invasion? 

I answer, only to the extent that our people shall make importa- 
tions impossible by reducing the cost of the home product. This 
will be the only restraint upon foreign merchandise glutting this 
market to the displacement of our own. If our present labor con- 
ditions are maintained—and this bill gets upon our statute-book— 
there will be no barrier in the way of a perfect inundation of foreign 
goods in the United States. It should not be forgotten that low 
duties or no duties substitute foreign imports for home-made and 
home-grown products, and to the extent of such substitution take 
work and wages from American labor. The effect of this bill, and 


there can be no other, is to increase importations, displace our own ~ 


products by foreign ones, diminish the outpyt of our factories and 
mills, curtail the demand for labor, and reduce the wages of those 
who may be able to get work. This result is as clear and manifest 


to me as the simplest mathematical problem, and we have only to— 


look at the wage scale of competing nations to know what our labor 
will come to with free trade or its equivalent. We cannot compete 
with foreign nations without the restraint of a tariff unless we have 


equal conditions and equal labor cost. To do this we must introduce 


European conditions and European methods in the United States, 
and that is what this bill and all similar legislation mean. 

“The trammels of trade must be removed” is the language em- 
ployed by the friends of this bill, How andin what way? First, by 
removing the duty from raw materials used in manufacture, which 
of hecessity will be at the expense and loss of those engaged in pre- 
paring them. But to a tariff reformer that is of little account. This 
trammel must go, to enable the domestic manufacturer to compete 


WILLIAM MKINLEY, JR. 109 
with the foreign manufacturer at home and abroad. ° After this, and 
next in order, the trammel of high wages must be removed. This is 
the most important and essential of all. This is the chief obstruc- 
tion. Free raw material will not equalize the condition of manufac- 


turers at home with those abroad. Cheap labor, underpaid labor, 


‘underfed labor will be the next demand of the advocates of this bill. 
Some of them have been frank enough to avow it already. This is 
the inexorable logic of the situation. If we are to control the whole 
of our own market and send our manufactures across the sea, it can 
be accomplished in one way only, by reducing the cost of the home 
product to the same or below the cost of the foreign product. To do 
this every intelligent man knows involves an enormous reduction of 
the wages of American workingmen. To this a revenue tariff comes ° 


at last, and from which there is no escape; and against it every true. 


American interest cries out in an emphatic and earnest protest. 
I propose a wiser and more patriotic solution of the difficulties 
of our financial situation. If we will buy more American goods and 


_. less foreign, we will reduce the income of the Government and leave 


and increase the surplus among the people. If we will buy more 
American merchandise and less of foreign make, manufactures at 


_,, home will run the year round and labor will be suitably rewarded 


and steadily employed. If we bad some of that lofty patriotism 
evinced by the fathers, if we were more American in feeling, sen- 
timent, and purpose, there would be fewer advocates of this bill. 


AMERICAN WAGES AGAINST EUROPEAN WAGES. 


There has been much effort made in this debate to show that, 
after all, American workingmen get no better pay than the working- 


a men of other countries. Let us consider this branch of the dis- 


__ eussion for a little while, for if it be true that labor here is no better 
rewarded than elsewhere, then the strength of protection is much 


weakened. I beg to cite, against the unsupported statements of the 
gentlemen who have already spoken upon the other side, the testi- 
mony of American workingmen whose opportunity for information 


~ from experience in both countries, and otherwise, makes their 


evidence incontrovertible. From the statements made March 10, 
*1886, before the Committee on Ways and Means, I read. Some of 


- this testimony is two™years old, but the only reason it is so is be- 


cause laboring men were not permitted to testify this year. [Laugh- 
ter and applause. | | 

Mr. Roger Evans, workingman, speaking upon this subject, 
said : 


ty 4 IP OORT Ne er kee wa) oe ee eee Sales. Beak Oe if. yes,” 
REE ee CELA Ee PRT UNA E e RaKene sete yA ee 


jl ty iar a OWN Sei ae i GaN Shes alia Sa Sa dag Ps a 


110° OS WILLIAM MKINLEY, TR 


Of course you ‘must not gauge the American workingman Dy the “Known 
of coarse bread and meat which will be necessary for him to subsist upon. It 
cannot be. The American workingman must have other things than those. 
He must be fed and clothed and be able to maintain his family as becomes 
the dignity of an American citizen. 


Another, Mr. Philip Hagan, spoke as follows: 


I was born under a free-trade government, and I believe that that 
free-trade government deprived me of an education, The reason of that 
was that I had to go to work when I ‘was eight years of age; and I 
remember also my little brother going to work under that free-trade 
government when he was eight years of age. JI remember well when 
there was a family of nine of us (including my father and mother), and when 
my wages for working in a mill were 10 cents per day. That was under a 
free-trade government. Subsequently I went up higher there to five shillings 
a day, or $1.25. That was about the limit I could reach—six and sixpence a 
day—and having to pay 60 cents out of that to my helper. 

Many members of this committee know all this just as well as I am stating 
it, and I am not going to detain you any longer; but I will state that as soon 


as my limited knowledge informed me that labor was protected in the United ; 


States I came here. I declared my intentions and I became a citizen of the 
United States. And now I have a family, and now I make regularly 14 
shillings a day. ‘The produce on which I lived in England came mostly from 
the United States, and certainly I ought to get it as cheap here as in England. 


I worked for five shillings a day in England, and I get 14 shillings a day 


here. Consequently IJ am able to send my children to school, and they are 
getting an education, which their father did not get under a free-trade goy- 
ernment. I want to see these children raised up and educated as citizens, 
[ Applause. | 


Mr. Thomas Williams said: 


As American citizens we can not be compelled to subsist upon what the 
working people of England, France, or other European countries subsist 
upon. The people of this country have made it just what it is, and in a very 
_ great measure the workingmen have made it what it is. Some of us have 
come across the Atlantic, leaving the land of our birth, and have come here 
with the expectations that we are going to better our condition. We have 
bettered it in a great measure. We will get along if you will let us alone. 
The manufacturers and ourselves will fight our own battles. 


Mr. Thomas P. Jones said: 


I came to this country to better my condition, and I am happy to say that 
_ I have bettered my condition. I have made more wages than I ever made in 
the old country. 

It has been shown here to-day, and, as I think, very clearly, that this 
tinkering with the tariff is not for the best interests of the country; is not for 


nen eed y gh oie 4g 
WIbraw M KINEEY, TR. ‘sat 


the best interests of the wealth-producers, of the men who built up this 
country. Then, gentlemen, I take it that it is your duty to throw this bill 
to the dogs. I certainly do not stand to dictate to you altogether in this 
matter, but I will assure you this far: that there is a school of education 


_ among the working people in this country, and that if this tinkering of the 


tariff is allowed to proceed; if you will, in spite of our remonstrances, go on 
destroying our interests and shutting up the industries of the country, our — 


_ working people will be ere long sufliciently educated to step forth and say, 


“‘ Gentlemen, thus far shall you go, and no farther.” We will elect men and 
send them here to legislate for our interests if you will not do so. We have 
the power, gentlemen, and you know it. 

Laborers in this country were never so cemented as they are to-day. One 
of the principal things which has helped us to that is this very bill which the 
honorable chairman has brought before this committee. Where I live, in Chi- 
cago, you would be surprised to see the feeling that exists among the working 
classes. And why? Because some of the people there worked in this country 
in free-trade times. I have a brother-in-law who, in free-trade times, traveled 
to his work 6 miles in the morning, getting there at sun-up, worked all day, 
and walked home at sundown, and all fora paltry 50 cents a day. I also have 
worked for 50 centsa day, but not in this country, thank God. Ibave worked 


‘for 25 cents a day, but I do not want to have to do it again. I have seen in 


the city of Glasgow, in Scotland, men working for 12 cents a day and a bowl 


of soup.: That does not become an American citizen. We cannot have such 


a state of affairs here, and we will not have it. 
I have a letter from Mr. William Barbour, of the Barbour Flax 


‘Spinning Company, of Paterson, N. J., under date of 31st of March, 
in which occurs the following: 


Dear Sir: Asa stockholder and director of Barbour Flax-Spinning Com- 


pany, of Paterson, N. J., 1 wish to make a statement to you regarding the flax- 


thread industry, and to call your attention to the effect which the proposed 
Mills bill would have uponit. * * * 
While I am an American born, and the industry I represent in Paterson, 


NI ., is thoroughly American, I am also a large stockholder in a flax-spinning 


_ American workingman, [Applause.] 


company in Ireland; and that you may judge of the relative wages paid in the 
two countries, I would state that the pay-rolls of the two mills, as recently 
compared, differed only about $500, the number of hands in the Irish mill 
being 2,900 against 1,400 in the New Jersey mill. * * * 
Yours truly, ‘Wn, BARBOUR. 
Hon. W. MoKIn1zy, Jr., 
Washington, D. C, 

That is, 1,400 American laborers are paid the exact sum which 
2,900 laborers are paid for the same labor in Ireland, and yet gentle- 
men would have us believe there is no difference in favor of the 


- 


iis : WILLIAM MEKINLBY, IR. ~ 


The Singer Sewing-Machine Company maintains a factory in Glas- 


gow, Scotland, as well as its works in New Jersey. It employs one- cate? 


third more hands in its Scotch establishment, yet the pay-roll there 
is only half that of its American works, the actual figures being 
$18,000 and $35,000. | 
Mr. HERBERT (of Alabama). Can the gentleman tell me the price a 
sewing-woman in Scotland pays for a sewing-machine and the price 
a sewing-woman in New Jersey pays for the same kind of a sewing- 
machine? 
Mr. McKintEy. Yes, sir; I am told the prices are about the same, 
except a sewing-machine in Scotland costs more than a sewing- 
‘machine in America. [Laughter and applause. | 
John H. Ross, superintendent Boston Thread and Twine Company, 
under date of April 23, 1888, says: 
We are paying three times the average wages paid for similar labor through- 
out Europe. 


Here is a letter under date of April 26, 1888, from the representa- 


tives of at least a half million workingmen of the United States: 


WasuHineton, D. C., April, 26, 1888. 

Dear Str: Having seen by the papers that Mr. Mills and others, in their 
speeches in the House of Representatives upon the tariff bill, have asserted the 
wages paid to labor were no higher in the United States than in Europe, we, 
the undersigned, desire to state, through you, to the members of Congress that 
such statements are misleading and false. Wages are higher in this country 
than in any other in the world. Notwithstanding the fact that the statements 
have been made by members on the floor of the House of Representatives that 
the tariff only benefits the manufacturer, and that they receive all the advan- 


tages from the protection given by the Government, we know that we receive 


our share of the benefits of protection on the industries we represent. 

We therefore emphatically protest against any reduction of the duties that 
will bring us on a level with the low price paid for labor in Europe. We in- 
sist upon the maintenance of a strong protective tariff, in order to maintain an 
American standard of wages for American workingmen. : 


Respectfully yours, 

Wiutiam Werne, President of Lovuts Arrtneton, Master Work- 
Amalgamated Association of Iron man Glass Blowers’ Assembly 148. 
and Steet Workers. JAMES CAMPBELL, President of 

Wn. Martin, Secretary of Amal- Local Assembly 300, Knights of 
gamated Association of Iron and Labor, Window Glass Workers of 
Steel Workers. America. 

JoHn Conxuine, Master Workman Wma. J. Smrru, President Amert. 
National Assembly Iron and Steel can Flint Glass Workers’ Union. 
Workers, Knights of Labor. Wo. J. Dinuon, Secretary. 


JoHn Correy, Master Workman 
Glass Blowers’ Assembly 149. 


Hon, Witt1aAm McKIn.ey, Washington, D. C. 


This bill proposes to equalize American production with European 
production by bringing down American wages to the level of Euro- 
pean wages, and I give you notice here to-day that you cannot do 


be it. [Applause. ] 


‘AGRICULTURAL WAGES. 
Now as to farm wages here as contrasted with other countries. I 


have a letter from Mr. Dodge, the Statistician of the Agricultural 


Department: 
UnitTED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 
BUREAU OF STATISTICS, 
Washington, D. C., March 29, 1888. 


TES gg Seve 
Bae aa es 
weg ne) Se 


7 * 7 . ee e ‘ : “Aa ‘ ait: he > f ; 
med a ios Sean tia a pena ; i465 j 
WILLIAM M‘KINLEY, JR. 113 


The wages of white labor in agriculture in this country is about $24 per | 


month. 

In England, the average wages paid for agricultural labor, according to 
J. 8. Jeans, in the Royal Agricultural Society’s Journal, was about $12.65 per 
month. It has been reduced since 1880. 


In the Argentine Republic the common farm hands get $10 to $12 per 


; month. 


In India agricultural wages are about $20 to $25 per year. 
Wages here in the wool-growing industry are two or three times as much 
as in competing countries. 


Consul Wamer, at Cologne, in his official report of May 21, 1886, 
to the State Department, gives a statement of the increase of exports 
from Germany to the United States; also the wages paid. The la- 


borer, whether he works in iron or steel works, factories, stone- 


quarries, or railroads, earns as a rule from 47 to 70 cents per day, 


-and for skilled labor he may get from 80 to 92 cents per day. Wo- 


men, when employed, earn from 24 to 30 cents per day. Boys under 
sixteen receive 19 to 24 cents a day, and an extra strong boy may 
earn 30 cents. Working hours are from 6 to 6 in summer, and 7 to 


- 7 in winter, with one hour for dinner. 


The consul-general at Vienna, in speaking of the Austrian la- 
borer, says a home of his own, though ever so modest, is beyond his 
reach. 

~ Consul Tanner, at Chemnitz, Saxony, says: 

The customary wages to hired servants on a farm are $57.19 per year, with 
board and lodging, for men, and $28.50 for females. Field hands are paid at 
the rate of 5} cents per hour. Women receive 2} cents per hour. 


Speaking of their food, he says: 


. Sugar or sirup are never allowed, and but very little milk. Tea is never 
used. For dinner they have meat and vegetables three times a week, and al- 


ways on Sundays. 


RL TORE eae CC ORD FPG or eI 1S eta oa ce tee Poe s , 
a oy eee Re.) face * US ara ei. Sal ve ally 5 baits wa cul sae va hoes 


114 WILLIAM MKINLAY. JR. 


This effectually aiepoaee of the claim. that wages in a Engl and "9 


other countries are as high as here. as 


WAGES IN THE SOUTH AND PROTECTION TO RICE. 


The wage question in the South is interesting, and I have seen it 
no better stated, and the reason for maintaining protection nowhere 
more strongly presented, than in the report made this year on the 
American rice industry, prepared by the Rice Association and ad- 
dressed to the association of Savannah. I read: 


During this period [from 1840 to 1860] the duty on foreign rice was 20 per 
cent. ad valorem. In all the rice-producing divisions of the country slave la- 
bor was then employed, and no foreign rice was imported. 


It will be noted that slave labor operates as a positive prohibition 
to foreign imports. It takes the place of a protective tariff, and pre- 
sents to labor a choice between the one and the other. 

Cheap labor can successfully compete with cheap labor on equal 
terms and with equal chance of profits in the markets of the world 
without the aid of legislative protection, and what I have read shows 
the character of labor best adapted to free trade. This report says 
the conditions surrounding the American producer have entirely 
changed. Let me read: 


Since the emancipation of the slaves the cost of agricultural labor in the 


South has been greatly increased. In the rice districts of the Carolinas and 
Georgia field labor ranges from 40 to 60 cents, and the best expert (not me- 
chanical) labor to $1 per diem. 

So that no time since 1865 could rice have been cultivated as a staple pro- 
duct without the protection afforded by import duties upon foreign grain. 


Now, with what labor does the Southern rice-grower compete? 
I will read from this report a quotation from the report of the 
United States minister at Pekin: 


Coming now to the field-hand whom the farmer hires, we arrive at the sub- 
stratum of labor. The average wages of an able-bodied young man is $12 per 
annum, food, straw, shoes, and free shaving. Deducting $4 for his Meu 
~ he saves $8 Bae ly OF may do so. 

Ten years’ saving will enable him to buy one-third of an acre of land 
(value per acre, $150) and necessary implements by which he can attain by 


his own labor a subsistence. * * * In ten years he can become possessor of | 


two-thirds of an acre. 


The report goes on further: 
In Japan, the field-hands receive their food and lodging with wages from 


$8.60 to $12.96 per annum. The wages of females are about $6 per annum, 


aia 
<i ae 


ei] 
be | 
a 
q 
2 
% 
408 
4 
a 
: 
: 
ey: 
s 


PL Nh Se Ie NO MA NM lee OM HS CoA NOS, Ni A vn CEN Clg aren, Pane peer, MONT UE MF, Nak Shae Nae de et eye Oe Sy 
re ie .% mS AL ere ,> » % eas 


In British India the per diem is 6 cents for males and 14 cents for females. 

In Kurnel the highest permanent wages are 50 cents per month, 

In Borat men employed by the year get from 80 to 100 pounds of grain per 
month and from 444 cents to $1.98 per annum. 

In Bombay and Madras laborers are paid from 6 to 12 cents per diem. 

Hence the wages paid at the South in the rice-fields are many fold greater 


than those paid to laborers in the rice-fields of Asia. Two-thirds of the cost of 


production is disbursed in wages in the former, 


The report then concludes: 


The contrast in this element of cost should render unnecessary any further 
comment than that without the intervention of the existing import tax on Asi- 
atic rice competition would seem impossible. 


This argument I commend for its force and fairness, and it makes 
out a strong case for the rice-grower, who in my judgment deserves 
protection and which we cheerfully accord; but the same argument 
applies with equal force to domestic wool, flax, and hemp, and other 
products of agriculture and manufacture. They are all within the 
same principle; all of them cultivated and produced with wage-labor 
greatly in excess of that paid abroad. Yet these American products 


are to be severely crippled, if not wholly destroyed. 


This statement of the rice-growers is a most striking demonstra- 


tion of the wisdom and necessity of protection. Jt shows what is 


true in the North is true in the South. The chief and controlling 


‘question is one of labor, and so long as the labor cost here in any 
department of employment exceeds the labor cost in Europe, so long 


we must have a protective tariff which shall compensate for this dif- 


_.. ference. And whether the labor is in the rice-fields of Georgia and of 


the Carolinas, or in the wheat-fields of the Northwest, in the fac- 
tories of New England, the mines of Maryland and Virginia, or the 
furnaces of Pennsylvania, Ohio, and New Jersey, it must be pro- 


- tected against the less rewarded labor whose products come in com- 


petition with theirs. Either this tariff must be maintained to main- 


tain the difference of wages or one of two things must inevitably 


occur: we must abandon production in many of the most valuable 


fields of industry here, or our labor must come down to the stand- 
ard of the competing labor; and we may discuss our theories until 
the frosts of December and we cannot alter the fact. 

This is the issue and it cannot be evaded. 


LABOR NOT ASKING FOR IT—CHEAP CLOTHING, 


It is a fact worthy to call to the attention of the House that a 
labor organization representing a million working men, with its 


“WILLIAM MEINLBY, JR ==———i(it*‘«s ‘i 


Ben Bie ieee 


116 WILLIAM M‘KINLEY, JR. 


representatives in this city whose sole duty is to look after the 


interests of labor, have given no sign of approval of this bill. Nota 
petition has come through this source asking for its passage, or any- 
thing like it. Whatever utterance has been made has been in oppo- 


sition and protest. Every member on this floor has observed the . 


activity of this committee of Knights of Labor in regard to legisla- 
tion affecting the interests of labor, but in all their vast constit- 
uency, found in every State of the Union, found in the fields, in 


the factories, workshops, and mines, no word orsign but of disap-— 


proval and condemnation has come. 

The expectations of cheaper clothes is not sufficient to Justify the 
action of the majority. This is too narrow for a national issue. 
Nobody, so far as I have learned, has expressed dissatisfaction with 
the present price of clothing. It is a political objection; it is a 
party slogan. Certainly nobody is unhappy over the cost of cloth- 
ing except those who are amply able to pay even a higher price than 


is now exacted. And besides, if this bill should pass, and the effect — 


would be (as it inevitably must be) to destroy our domestic manu- 
factories, the era of low prices would vanish, and the foreign manu- 
facturer would compel the American consumer to pay higher prices 
than he has been accustomed to pay under ‘‘ the robber tariff,” so 
called. 

I represent a district comprising some 200,000. people, a large 
majority of the voters in the district being workingmen. I have 
represented them for a good many years, and I have never had a 
a complaint from one of them, that their clothes were too high. 
Have you? [Applause on the Republican side.] Has any gentle- 
man on this floor met with such complaint in his district? 

Mr. Morss (of Massachusetts). They did not buy them of mie. 

Mr. MoKinutEy. No! Let us see; if they had bought of the gen- 
tleman from Massachusetts it would have made no difference, and 
there could have been no complaint. Let us examine the matter. 

[Mr. McKinley here produced a bundle containing a ‘suit of 
clothes, which he opened and displayed amidst great laughter and 
applause. ] 

Come, now, will the gentleman from Massachusetts know his 
own goods? [Renewed laughter.] We recall that the chairman 
of the Committee on Ways and Means talked about the laboring 
man who worked for ten days at a dollar a day, and then went with 
his ten dollars wages to buy a suit of clothes. It is the old story. 
It is found in the works of Adam Smith. [Laughter and applause 
on the Republican side.] I have heard it in this House for ten years 


past. It has served many a free-trader. It is the old story, I re- 


ae Tg ri gitn ES Te Lote ys mes 2ea0 ¥ MP Wat wa bs ma MES om ee ay ae Wie See $2 tee Rran 
4 sans Pa =, ae 7 bo) ia hn, CARRS 5 
a ii oat] P Re, 


© WIELTAM IPRINLRY. TR oe ea Gly, 


peat, of the man who gets a dollar a day for his wages, and having 
worked for the ten days goes to buy his suit of clothes. He believes 
he can buy it for just $10; but ‘‘the robber manufacturers” have 
been to Congress, and have got 100 per cent. put upon the goods in 


- = the shape of a tariff, and the suit of clothes he finds cannot be 
bought for $10, but he is asked $20 for it, and so he has got to go 


back to ten days more of sweat; ten days more of toil; ten days 
more of wear and tear of muscle and brain to earn the $10 to pur- 


chase the suit of clothes. Then the Chairman gravely asks is not 


ten days entirely annihilated ? 

Now, a gentleman who read that speech or heard it was so 
touched by the pathetic story that he looked into it and sent me a 
suit.of clothes identical with that described by the gentleman from 
Texas, and he sends me also the bill for it, and here is the entire 
suit, ‘robber tariffs and taxes and all” have been added, and the 
retail cost is what? Just $10. [Laughter and applause on the Re- 


- publican side.] So the poor fellow does not have to go back to work 


~_ 


ten days more to get that suit of clothes. He takes the suit with 


_ him and pays for it just $10. [Applause. ] 


But in order that there might be no mistake about it, knowing 


the honor and honesty of the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. 


Morse], he went to his store and bought the suit. [Laughter and 
cheers on the Republican side.}] I hold in my hand the bill. 
Mr. STRUBLE (of Iowa). Read it. 
Mr. McKINLEy (reading) : 
Boston, May 4, 1888. 
J.D. Williams, bought of Leopold Morse & Co.; men’s, youths’, and boys’ 


clothing; 131 to 187 Washington street, corner of Brattle. To one suit of 
woolen clothes, $10. Paid. 


[Renewed laughter and applause. ] 
-Tnever knew of a gentleman engaged in this business who sold 


: his clothes without a profit. [Laughter.] And there is the same 


$10 suit described by the gentleman from Texas that can be bought 


in the city of Boston, can be bought in Philadelphia, in New 


York, in Chicago, in Pittsburgh, anywhere throughout the coun- 
try at $10 retail the whole suit, coat, pants, and vest, and 40 
per cent. less than it could have been bought in 1860 under 
your low tariff and low wages of that period. [Great applause.] 
It is a pity to destroy the sad picture ‘of the gentleman from 


Texas which was to be used in the campaign, but the truth must 


be told. But do you know that if it was not for protection you 
would pay a great deal more for these clothes? I do not intend 


big Vy Migs ee ee ae Cet A be mal cles Pom Te eg we Pune Ge ke he 4 
iS So tet 2a A Sa eth ek lh ve ad mi MN at a 
ane i ho a we Dy. ie 


ne 
4 
) 


7 


118 | WILLIAM MKINLEY, JR. ~ en 


} 

to go into that kranch of the question, but I want to give one brief 
illustration of how the absence of American competition immedi- 
ately sends up the foreign prices, and it is an illustration that every 
man will remember. My friend from Missouri [Mr. Clardy], who 
sits in front of me, will remember it. The Missouri Glass Company 
was organized several years ago for the manufacture 6f coarse fluted 
glass and cathedral glass. Last November the factory was destroyed 
by fire. Cathedral glass was their specialty. Within ten days from 
the time that splendid property was reduced to ashes the foreign 
price of cathedral glass advanced 28 per cent. to the American con- 
sumer. [Applause on the Republican side.] Showing that whether 
you destroy the American production by free trade or by fire it is 
the same thing; the price goes up to the American consumer, and 
all you can do is to pay the price the foreigner chooses to ask. 
[Renewed applause. ] 


THE POOR MAN’S BLANKETS. 


Now, the gentleman had a lot of blankets here the other day. 
The very climax of the gentleman’s speech was reached when he 
came to a description of the American blankets, and the enormous 
burdens that the tariff laid upon the poor man’s bed and covering. 
Why, you would have supposed that he was enunciating the na- 
tional issue for 1888, and I think really that is about all they have 
left now that civil-service reform is gone. [Laughter. ] 

Now what is the fact ? He told you that for one pair of 5-pound 
blankets, which he exhibited, the price was $2.51, the labor cost 35 
cents, the tariff $1.90, and the difference between the iabor and the 
duty $1.55. Then the gentleman from Texas turned to this House 
and to his admiring associates and listening audience and said: 
‘“Why does not the manufacturer give the laborer that $1.55, the 
difference between the labor cost and the duty ?” which inquiry was 
followed by deafening applause. 

Did he not leave the impression upon the mind of every one that 
the manufacturer got the duty ? Heasked why did he not give it to 
the laborer ? and turning he said: ‘‘ Of course he would not do that; 
he put it into his pocket.” Iwill tell you the reason, or at least a 
sufficient reason, why the manufacturer did not give it to the laborer, 
It was because he did not get it himself. 

I do not know where the gentleman got his figures, but I have a 
careful statement from one of the leading blanket manufacturers of 
this country, and I intend to give the facts fully. 

Blankets are numbered according to grade and according to 
weight. There are several grades of five-pound blankets numbered 


nS Fed 


x * a ain 
Sess 7 er 


lei WILLIAM UKINLEY, Ji oe Tig 


1, 9, 3, 4, 5 5 A No. 1 five-pouttd blanket made in the city of 
Philadelphia sells for $1.72. The labor represented in the blanket is 
874 cents; the duty is $1.02. Of a scarlet blanket, five pounds, the 
price is $2.27; the labor is 874 cents; the duty is $3.17. Of the white 


~_ all-wool Falls of Schuylkill blanket the price is $3.62; the labor $1.05; 


the duty $2.60. Of the Gold-Medal blanket the price is $4.53; the 
labor $1.05; the duty $3.50. 

Now, if the duty was added to the cost, what would the American 
manufacturers get for these blankets? They should get for the 
first blanket $2.74. How much do they get? They get only $1.72. 
They should get for the second blanket, duty added, $3.77. How 
much do they get ? They get $2.27. They should get for the third 
$5.12. How much do they get? They get $3.17. They should get, 


~ duty added, for the fourth class $6.22. How much do they get? 


They get $4.35. They should get, duty added, for the highest grade 
$8.03. How much do they get? They get $4.05. 

What did these same blankets cost in 1860 under a revenue tariff, 
under the free-trade domination of this country by the Democratic 


party ? What did we pay for the same blankets that year as con- 


trasted with what we pay now ? The blanket that sells to-day for 
$1.02 sold in 1860 for $2. The blanket that sells now for $1.45 sold in 


4860 for $2.50. The blanket that sells now for $1.31 sold in 1860 for 


$2.25. The blanket that sells now for. $1.90 sold in 1860 for $3.50. 
The blanket that sells now for $2.58 sold for $3.75 in 1860. The 


os blanket that sells now for $4.35 sold for $7.50 in 1860. The blanket 
- that sells for $5.85 now sold for $10 in 1860. The blanket that sells 


now for $6.80 sold for $13 in 1860, 


PRICES OF 1860 AND 1888 COMPARED. 


Now let us see how the wages are, for that is an essential element 


in this question. In 1860 a spinner got $6 a week in this same estab- 


- lishment, and Iam speaking from the books of the manufacturer. 


It is no idle and hearsay, second-hand statement that Iam making, 


nor does it come from any foreign source, nor is it based on any in- 


_. formation from abroad. Itis taken from the actual books of a manu- 


facturer of blankets in Philadelphia, who has been manufacturing 
for a great many years. A spinner got for a week’s work in 1860, 
$6. What does he get now? Fifteen dollars. Six dollars a week in 


1860, and $15 a week in 1888! A piecer boy got $1.15 a week in 1860, 


and he gets $3.50 now. A weaver got $4 in 1860, and he gets $10 in 
1888. A finisher, unskilled, got $4.15 in 1860, and he gets $9 in 1888, 
A skilled finisher got $6 in 1860, and he gets $16 in 1888, A dye-house 


120 ‘WILLIAM MEKINLEY. JR 3 


hand, unskilled, got $4.25 in 1860, and he gets $9 in 1888. A com-\ 


mon laborer got $4 in 1860, and he gets $7.50 in 1888. Askilled 
laborer got $4.50 in 1860, and he gets $9 in 1888. An engineer got __ 


$6.50 in 1860, and he gets $16 in 1888. 
The weekly earnings of the spinner in 1860 could buy three pairs 
of cheap blankets for one week’s work. The spinner under American 


protection in 1888, for the price of one week’s work can buy fifteen 


pairs of blankets. Talk about productive capacity ! Think about 


buying capacity ! The spinner buys his blankets for one-half*what 
they cost him in 1860; and he gets two and a half times as much for 


like your bill? [Applause.] Do you wonder these men condemn 
the action of the committee for not listening to their protests ? Why, 
you are preparing here to-day--and that is the purpose and effect of 
this bill—you are preparing here to reduce the scale of American 
wages. ButI amnotthrough with the blanketissue. You may think 
that what I have already given is sufficiently exhaustive, but I have 
an actual transaction here that I know will be of interest to the mem- 
bers of this House, and, therefore, at the expense of wearying your 


patience, I am going to ask your attention to it. [Cries of ‘Go 


on !”] 


THE UNITED STATES BUYING FOREIGN BLANKETS. 


‘his labor in 1888 as he got in 1860. Do you wonder these men donot — 


On the 25th of March, 1887, the United States Government ad- 


vertised for bids for the purchase of blankets for the use of the 
medical department of the Army. This was in 1887, under the 
present Administration. There were foreign bids and there were 
American bids. Now, if the President is right in saying that the 
duty is added to the cost, then the foreign cost, duty added, ought 
to be just equal to the American price. Now, what are the facts of 
this transaction? As I have said, there was a foreign bid, and there 
was an American bid. The foreign bid was for a four-pound 
blanket for medical purposes, to be furnished for $2.25,. For the 
same four-pound blanket for the same purposes, the American bid 
was $2.56, there being a difference of 30,2, cents. Who, who do you 


- suppose got the contract ? There wasa foreign bid, and an American 


bid, and the difference between the bids was 30 cents on each 
blanket. Now tell me which manufacturer, the American or Eng- 
lish got the contract? Is there anybody here who would not have 
given it to the American, there being a difference of only 30 cents 
between the bids ? 


Is there any gentleman on this floor who would send abroad to ~ 


get a pair of blankets merely to save 30 cents on them, thus taking: 


‘ Sea 
¢ aed “i 
3 oan PS ae SAN ae 


“WILLIAM MINTY, JR. he ae oe oe ae 


away from the American manufacturer and the American farmer 
and the American laborer that much business? However that may 
be, that contract did go abroad. English labor, with foreign wool, 
pinks those 2,000 blankets for the use of our army. American labor 


was boycotted and they came in without paying any duty. The 


Government took advantage of a law that stands on the statute- _ 
book and admitted them free of duty. There being so little revenue 
in the Treasury, it was necessary, of course, to save every penny, 
so they took advantage of that law which permits the United States 
to bring in goods free of duty. 
Now let us look at the figures. The duty on blankets of that 
quality is 18 cents a pound and 35 per cent. ad valorem. Eighteen 
cents a pound upon 2,000 blankets, 4 pounds each, is $1,440; 35 per 
cent. ad valorem is $1,576.40, making a total duty upon those 2,000 
blankets, which were bought from a foreign blanket maker, of 
- $3,016.40. The cost of those-.blankets, free of duty, amounts to 
$4,504; with the duty added the total would be $7,520.40. : 
“Now, if the President is right and if the chairman of the Com- 


"mittee on Ways and Means is right in saying that this duty is 


added to the price to the American consumer, then $7,520.40 is 

-exactly what the American price would be. 

"What was the American price? The American price was $5,120. 
That is, it was $2,400 less than the foreign cost, duty added. With- 
out any duty, the difference between the cost of the American and 
the cost of the foreign blankets, the whole 2,000, was about $600. 
Now you see the American manufacturer does not get the duty, and 


ae that, I submit, is a sufficient reason why he does not give it to 
_ his workmen. I am. very sorry that the President of the United 


States did not know of this transaction, which had occurred 


under his own administration, so that he might have avoided 


making the blunder which he made in his message when he said 


thatthe duty was added to the cost. And I do not know what 


those around me may think about it, but Iam very sorry that.our 
Government went abroad and bought those blankets just to save 
30 cents apiece on them. [Laughter and applause on the Republican 
side. | 

I wish that this Government of ours, which is supported by 
its own people, and not by foreigners, would patronize its own 
people. I think that is an example of patriotism which should 
be set by those charged with public administration. I wish the 
men who pay the taxes to support this Government, to pay the 
President’s salary and other expenses of the Government, would be 
_ patronized when the Government has anything to buy, don’t you? 


and are you not a, little ashamed of this transaction, all of you? I _ 
do not know whether the like was ever done under any former ad- 
ministration or not; but it never ought to be done, except in time — 
of war or great puBhiC necessity, by any future administration of 
any party. [Applause on the Republican side. ] 


ALL EUROPE INTERESTED IN THE PASSAGE OF THIS BILL. 


All Europe is watching the progress of this bill. Its immediate 


promoters are not following it with keener vigilance and more 


absorbing interest than their foreign sympathizers. All trades, all 


manufacturers across the Atlantic, are watching it with the deepest } 


concern and anticipating the rich haat which awaits them when 

our gates shall be opened, our industrial defenses torn down, and 

free and unrestrained access to our splendid markets afforded for 

the products of their cheap labor. 

: I have in my hand the Pottery Gazette, published in London, 
under date of January 2, 1888, from which I read: 


_ Earthenware is reported to be reduced to 30 per cent. This will help the 
trade, but we trust the men and masters here will not be too sanguine as to 
results and upset the trade. 


Their information upon the earthenware schedule is quite accu- 
rate; they had it in advance of the minority members of the com- 
mittee, and while thoroughly pleased the editor of the Gazette feels 
constrained to advise the men and masters not to be too sanguine as 
to results and thereby upset the trade and defeat the bill. He ad- 
vises them not to rejoice too soon; the news is almost too good to be 
true, and too much ecstasy on their part might prejudice it before 
the American House. Why should they rejoice when our tariff goes 


down? Our workingmen and employers have no such feeling. They 


dread it; they oppose it; they know what it means to them. They 
know that it will benefit the foreign rival and bring distress to them. 
The reduction of duties upon earthenware will help Stafford- 
_ shire, England, and their people know it well, while it will hurt 
nerican potters and the labor they employ. 
Again I read: 


Our American friends are expected over shortly— 


They are detained here during the pendency of this bill— 


when we shall hear what the effect is to be of the promised alteration in their 
tariff. The protected manufacturers in the States are already making efforts 
to stop the reduced imports, but it will be useless, 


- “WILLIAM M-KINLEY, IR. 123 


With what confidence they speak! They mistake the temper of 


our people. They are staking too much upon the fulfillment of 


Democratic pledges, 


This long nursed and favored class must give way a little to the consumer, 
whose long suffering has at length come to the front. : 


The generous sympathy which the English manufacturer has for 
the American consumer is touching indeed. 


The consumers are as ten to one of the United States inhabitants, and the 
protection to the pottery and glass manufacturer of the commoner description 
represents the cost of labor many times over, 


This reads like the speech of the gentleman from Texas. It 
sounds so like the Democratic speeches of the last two weeks that 
we might well conclude that the gentleman of the majority on this 
floor were representing an English and not an American constituency: 

Again I read: 


Is this fair to the housekeeper? Isit right? Nay, is it just? 


This sympathy would have been more highly appreciated by the 
American consumer had it been extended at a time when the Staf- 
fordshire potteries controlled the American market, before we had 
become successful competitors, and when they were charging us 100 
per cent. more for the coarse tableware that went into the houses of 


_. the masses than we now have to pay, resulting from the competition 


created by our own potteries... The hope of foreign producers is in 
the Democratic party. 
Foreign producers are already preparing for the new order of 


things. They are already establishing agencies in the United States, 


a] 


ee preparing to invade and occupy this market. 


JT have among my notes a letter from Andris Jochams, of Charle- 
roi, Belgium, proprietors of the La Providence Rolling Mills, which 


~ gives unmistakable evidence of preparation for the passage of this 


i 


oy OW Si eat 


bill. 
Let me read the letter: 


CHARLEROI, le 14th March, 1888. 
Dear Stirs: I beg to take notice that we have appointed Messrs. Weir, 
Smith & Rogers as our sole and general agents in the United States of 


- America, for the sale of our architectural iron, as per circular inclosed, and — 


you will oblige us in addressing your demands to them in future. 
With the prospect of a reduction in duties on architectural iron and steel 


124 WILLIAM MKINLAY. TR 


in your country we will be soon ready to offer you such advantages in prices, eh 


we 


and quality that you will find a nice profit in importimg from us. ae a 
We remain, dear sirs, with much respect, your obedient servant, pe 
ANDRIS JOCHAMS. 
Messrs. WEIR, SmitH & RoceERs, 41 Broadway, New York. 


The American public, it will be observed, is assured that ‘‘ with 
the prospect of reduction of duties on architectural iron and steel in 
your country we will be soon ready to offer you such advantages in 
prices and quality that you will find a nice profit in importing from ~— 
us.” Reduced duties are to increase their profit which, for the time, — 
at least, is to be divided so as to give to the American ae a 
‘* nice profit. x 


TRUSTS. 


There has been much discussion about trades and combinations in 
the course of this debate—trusts to control prices, diminish produc- 
tion, extinguish competition—and these are made a fruitful theme 
for vicious assaults upon the tariff. This is the only new feature 
that has been developed in the tariff discussion, and therefore de- 


- gerves passing attention. I have no sympathy with combinations 


organized for this or any other purpose, to control the supply and ~ — 


- thereby control prices. I regard all such as against public policy 


and opposed to fair and legitimate trade. They are, however, in no 
wise related to the tariff, and the tariff is in no way responsible for 
them. ; 2 
There is nothing in the tariff laws to promote or even suggest _ 
them. They are of foreign origin—they originated in free-trade 
countries. They can and do exist among producers and factors not 


‘in any way affected bv the tariff. They are of recent date in the 


United States. The most widely known trusts of the country are 
not engaged in what are termed.‘‘protected industries.” The oil 
trust and the whisky trust, which are so commanding and powerful, 
which make prices and alter them, control supply and production, 
these surely cannot be charged to a protective tariff, for nothing 
which they make or merchandise is subject to protective tariffs. 
The most oppressive trusts—oppressive to the American gonsumer— _ 
are those which deal in foreign goods, and all of which will be pro- — 
moted and strengthened by the passage of this bill. 

There is a trust or combination made up of all the plate-glass 
manufacturers of Europe. I have here a circular which is dated 
London, 25th of April, 1887, and which reads: 


af , +t i ~ ae: 
» ty a te 
a? Sie se 
en <% Sa aM 


o ing them of a burden they now have to bear, and thus enabling © 
_ them to break down American competition, which alone has reduced 
the price of plate-glass, and now prevents the most extortionate 


i 


vane mat tee sipinntios Pee Ne  h ATE Nery pee ee vam te af 
~ WILLIAM eeacae > TRes 125 


~Drar Sir: We beg to inform you that the Associated Plate-Glass Manu- 
facturers have revised their prices for plate-glass of all descriptions, and that, 
withdrawing all previgus quotations, we inclose you herewith our tariff of 
prices, the discount from which will be 380 per cent., with the exception of 


~ glazing glass used for ene purposes, the discount fron which will be 25 
per cent. 


We are, dear sir, yours, respectfully, 
LONDON AND MANCHESTER PLATE. GLAss 
MANUFACTURING COMPANY (LIMITED). 
Union PLATE-GLASS COMPANY (LIMITED). 
PILKINGTON BROTHERS. 
A de Granp ry. AGENCE GENERALE DES-GLACERIES, Belges. 


This trust is still in force. Here is a foreign combination to con- 
trol the price of plate-glass, and the gentlemen on the other side are 
engaged in making the monopoly more complete and controlling by 
reducing the import duties now paid on their product and by reliev- 


exactions for the foreign product upon American consumers. 
- Here, again, is an importers’ trust in the same line of goods. I 


-‘tead from the New York Herald of, February 28 an account of tae 
- investigation by the New York Legislature: 


: THE GLASS TRUST. 
Mr. James H. Heroy, an importer of plate and French glass, was next called 


~ to tell what he knew about the glass trust. He is a spry old gentleman who 


has been in the. business for fifty years. Colonel Bliss asked the witness to_ 


identify a circular. It is a very peculiar circular, and will open the eyes of the 
can public, if not the eyes of the cominittee. It is as follows : 


_ “Fnry C. MARRINNER, aoa 


** Plate and sheet-glass tmporter, No. 126 South Fifth avenue: 
“We beg leave to quote you 70, ‘0, and 5 per cent. discount from the 


- price-list, January 20, 1887, for French window-glass. In: case you wish to 
: make any large purchases we can make you extra discounts as follows: If you 


receive from us or any members of our association in New York (which in- 


cludes all the regular importers), either all from one house or part from each 
of the houses, one hundred boxes in one calendar month, you are entitled to 


an extra discount of 5 per cent.; or if the deliveries to you in any one calendar 
month from any or all of these houses should amount to $1,000, then yeu will 
be entitled to an extra discount of 10 per cent. This is done, as you will see, 
to give large purchasers the advantage over small buyers, which they have been 


long entitled to, but which could not be given to them until we made our pres- 
ent organization to regulate prices. 


“19600 WONLEAM MEKINLEY, IR 


«This arrangement of rebates takes effect from February 1. 


‘“‘ We can also make deductions from the new price-list of January 5, 1888, : 


for colored, enameled, ground, and cathedral glass, extra discounts, as follows: 
For orders of twenty cases or 2,000 feet or more at one time, 10 per cent. 
discount, 
‘‘For import orders of 7,500 feet or more of cathedral and one hundred 
cases or more colored, enameled, and ground glass we will make special prices, 
according to the conditions of the order. 
“Yours, very truly, 
‘“HERoY & MARRINNER.” 


NOTHING DONE IN A HURRY. 


There was no doubt about the intention of that trust. Mr. Heroy said, ‘it 
was simply” to make prices below which they would not sell their goods. At 
the last meeting he attended he thought it was the desire of the combination 


to reduce prices, and added, ‘‘ We have not yet decided what to do in the case . 


of a man who undersells us. We do not decide these things ina hurry. As 


a result of the combination prices have advanced. I can’t tell exactly the 


amount of the business done. It is largely exaggerated, but, including all 
branches, it is about $20,000,000.” 


I have also in my possession a copy of the trust contract. Not. 
content with making this combination among themselves, they 


sought in every way possible to induce our American producers of 
plate-glass to join them and assist in fleecing the American public. 
There is a foreign trust on china and earthen ware. I have the 
evidence here in the London Pottery Gazette of March 10, 1888, from 
which I read: | 


If any manufacturers are not true to the rules of the new association the 
bond they will have signed will enable their fellow-manufacturers to sell them 
up ‘“‘rump and stump.” Nothing but the state of dire necessity into which 


the trade has fallen would tempt men to put their hands to such a bond. The 


scheme has just been successful with the china manufacturers. They have 
just obtained a second advance. 

If the keen buyers who always want to beggar the trade and reduce prices 
say to a manufacturer who will not sell at lower than the fixed rate, ‘‘ Well, 
if IT am forced to pay the association price I will not buy from you,” such 


manufacturer can reply, ‘‘ All right; if you buy from another, and I have to . 


stand for orders, I shall get my pull out of your business, for our rules will 
not let me suffer through refusing to reduce at your request.” So you see one 
manufacturer cannot be played off against the others. 


There is a foreign tin trust and a foreign iron trust to control 


prices and deprive the public of the advantages of legitimate com- — 


a! » * Rt ie ae « 


WILLIAM M‘KINLEY, UR. ae 127 


‘ petition. All these are to be benefited by this bill. Its author 


should change its title so as to make it read, ‘‘ An act to promote 
foreign trusts and combines and break down American competition.” 
We should set our faces against all these unnatural associations. We 


_ should crush out those at home, and do nothing to encourage those 


abroad who organize to prey upon the American market. We can 
control the former, but the latter, while robbing our own citizens, 


are beyond our control and out of our jurisdiction. 


PROTECTION SENTIMENT EXTENDING. 


_ While the Democratic majority, aided by the active force of 
the Administration, is seeking to break down the protective system, 
under which we have realized such unexampled prosperity, what 
do we witness elsewhere and in other countries? Within the last 
six months there was held a great meeting in England, represent- 
ing thirty thousand workingmen “The meeting was called to con- 
sider the depressed condition of labor, and to demand such a change 
of the fiscal legislation as would abandon free trade in the United 


Kingdom and adopt a protective tariff. They resolved— 


First. That this meeting is strongly of opinion that the time has come 


when all classes interested in the nation’s prosperity should unite in demand- 


ing a revision of its fiscal system. 

Second. That. this meeting records its opinion that all articles imported 
from abroad should bear a fair share of taxation with the same articles pro- 
duced at home. 


These resolutions, with a suitable memorial, were presented to 
the British Parliament. In the same month the Chamber of Com- 


_ merce of Lincolnshire, England, adopted the following resolutions: 


' That this meeting is of opinion that the fearful depression both of trade 
and agriculture are intimately connected with, and both are caused by, 
foreign competition, resulting in low prices, which are affecting all the indus- 
tries of this country; that false free trade is a failure obtained at the expense 
of the native producer. This meeting, therefore, begs to urge of their repre- 
sentatives in Parliament and the government the necessity of speedily taking 
measures to ‘prevent the ruin impending over trade, and especially over the 
land of this country and all concerned in it, either as owners, cultivators, or 
tradesmen, and that a reconsideration should at once take place of our present 
fiscal arrangement. 


~ The working people of England find that competition with countries 


po employing cheaper labor too oppressive to bear longer, and are de- 
__-‘ manding in the interest of themselves and families to be saved from 


NYSE or Ty eobiarth ita tht en eae BR ak A e468 3) AN ‘Sn. a foal Ma) Le Te Oe ee ey ASR ie 
be ‘ tS ; 4 ae mt a % = 


128 ; WILLIAM M*KINLEY, JR. 


gium—countries whose labor is even more poorly paid than the labor 
of England. They have come to appreciate at last that nothing but 
tariffs which are defensive in their character will save them from 
utter ruin and destitution. We will be in precisely the same situation 
if this bill shall become alaw. Our competition is with all the world, 


for no labor is so well paid as ours, and being the highest paid labor — ) 


invites the sharpest competition from the lowest. We will have no 


the further degradation it will entail. It is not American competi- rz 
- tion they dread; it is the competition of France, Germany, and Bel- 


objection to free trade when all the competing nations shall bring the — | 


level of their labor up to ours; when they shall accept our standard; 
when they shall regard the toiler as aman and not a slave; but we 
will never consent while we have votes and the power to prevent the 


_ dragging down of our labor to that of the European standard. [Ap- 


plause.} Let them elevate theirs; let them bring theirs up to our level, 
and we will then have no contention about revenue or protective 
tariffs. We will meet them in open field, in home and neutral mar- 


kets, upon equal footing, and the fittest will survive. [Applause.] — 


This is no time to seriously think of changing our policy. The best 
sentiment, the practical judgment of mankind, is turning to it. Sir 
Charles Tupper said a year ago in the Canadian House of Commons: 


No person who has carefully watched the progress of public events and 


public opinion can fail to know that avery great and marked change hastaken ~ | 


place in all countries, I may say, in relation to this question (protection). * * * 
In England, where it was a heresy to intimate anything of that kind a few 
years ago, even at the period to which I am referring, a great and marked 


change in public opinion has taken place. Professor Sidgewick, a learned 


Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, and professor of moral philosophy in 


_ that great university, and the gentleman who read at the meeting of the Brit- 


ish Association in 1886 a paper on political economy, has published a work in 
which opinions that would have been denounced as utterly fallacious and heret- 
ical at that time have been boldly propounded as the soundest and truest prin- 


ciples of political economy. * * * Statesmen of the first rank, men occupying 


high and commanding positions in public affairs in England, have unhesitat- 


ingly committed themselves to the strongest opinion in favor of fair protection 
- to British industry. is 


CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES. 


Why, even Canada, a dependency of free-trade England, is too 


wise to favor the false doctrines of her mother, and has rejected her 


teachings, and to-day is prosperous under a protective system, which — 


she in the main borrowed from us, I wish every citizen might read ES 


a ‘of 
seo 


: 
ee 


. 
a _ ing of a previous period in the history of Canada under free trade, 
P gaid: — 


Mee ers, Ren ura. Pe mee 


WILLIAM M‘KINLEY, JR. 129 


3 _ the budget speech of the minister of finance in Canada, and contrast 
it with that of my honored but misguided friend from Texas. On 


the 12th of May, 1887, in the Commons, Sir Charles Tupper, in speak- 


When the languishing industries of Canada embarrassed the finance minister. 
of that day, when instead of large surplus large deficits succeeded year after 
year, the opposition urged upon that honorable gentleman that he should en- 


-- deavor to give increased protection to the industries of Canada, which would 


prevent them from thus languishing and being destroyed. We were not suc- 


~ cessful—I will not say in leading the honorable gentleman himself to the con- 


clusion that that would be a sound policy, for I have some reason to believe 


~ that he had many a misgiving on that question—but at all events we were not 


able to change the policy of the gentleman who then ruled the destinies of 
Canada. As is well known, that became the great issue at the subsequent 
general election of 1878, and the Conservative party being returned to power, 
pledged to promote and foster the industries of Canada as far as they were able, 


brought down a policy through the hands of my honored predecessor, Sir 


Leonard Tilley, * * * and I have no hesitation in saying that the success of 
that policy thus propounded and matured from time to time has been such as 
to command the support and confidence of a large portion of the people of this 


 ‘gountry down to the present day. 


- Under this system he proceeds to show that Canada has enjoyed 


a prosperity the like of which she never enjoyed before, and then, 
- instead of recommending a reduction of duties, proposes the increase 
- of duties upon certain foreign merchandise, to the end that Canadian 


industries may be fostered thereby. , 
Here is what the gentleman from Texas, our premier, says, Mark 


_ the contrast: : 


Now, sir, what has been the result of this policy [of protection]? Enor- 


- mous taxation upon the necessaries of life has been a Constant drain upon the 


people; taxation, not only to support the expenditures of the Government, but 
taxation so contrived as to fill the pockets of a privileged class and take from 
the people five dollars for private purposes for every dollar that it carries to 
the public Treasury. * * * This is one of the vicious results, etc. * * * What 
use have our manufacturers for the tariff at all, Why are they constantly be- 
seeching Congress not to ruin them by reducing war rates? * * * It is a 
policy that is at war with the institutions of this country—the concentration of 
the wealth of the country in the hands of a few. 


_ My friend has not read with profit or purpose the history of his 
country. Wedded to the economic teachings of Galhoun and Wal- 


_ ker, he has not observed their contradiction and refutation in the 


130 WILLIAM M*KINLEY, JR. eg 


matchless progress of his country. He still lives in the past. The — 
condition of his own State, her boundless resources, appeal to him, — 
but her voice, if heard, is not heeded. He seeks to throw across her — 
pathway and the pathway of the Republic the tattered dogmas of a — 
half century ago and stop the wheels of progress, interrupt our ad- — 
vancing civilization, and stifle the just aspirations of the people. — 
The country is in no frame of mind for such retrogression; against — 
it every instinct of humanity revolts, every noble sentiment pro- — 


tests. 


If the people of the country want free trade or a strictly revenue > 


tariff it'is their privilege to have it. The majority voice should be 
controlling, but it must be after a full, fair, and candid expression. 


I do not believe that a majority in this House were instructed by — 
their constituents to vote for this bill or any other committed to the | 


doctrine of free trade. If the issue had been so understood many 
of the gentlemen who are promoting this legislation would not be 
here. I do not believe the country understood in 1886 that if the 


Democratic party carried a majority in the House it would do what 

is now being proposed. How many Representatives on that side of — 
the House would have been left at home upon a platform favoring — 
free wool and substantially free agricultural products? More by far a 


than your majority. 


LET THE PEOPLE VOTE ON THE ISSUE BETWEEN A REVENUE TARIFF - 


AND A PROTECTIVE TARIFF. 


The opportunity of the people of this country is next November. — 
~ If they want free trade they can so vote, but they must have it after — 
full discussion. The majority now on the floor of this House were — 
not instructed by the elections in 1886 to vote for this bill; there was _ 
no such issue, Wherever we sought to make it the issue it was ob- 

scured or denied by Democratic protectionists in the North. No- — 
body knows that better than the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. _ 


Scott], the friend of labor. [Laughter.] 


The House of Representatives, I say, was not elected upon that ~ 
issue. I challenge your party, under the instructions given you by ~ 


_ the people two years ago, to force this measure through the House. 


Mr. Scott. Will the gentleman allow me—— c=) 


Mr. McKINLEY. Certainly. 
Mr. Scott. I voted for the consideration of the Morrison bill; 
and my people sent me back here by double my previous majority. 


Mr. McKinutEy. Jam aware of that; I had not intended to allude — : 


to the gentleman at all. A man who has under his control thirty or 


forty thousand miles of railroad; a man who has coal mines al YG : 


a 


i iag SiS i a aia ae hee ae Cale 


“Wrentam MKINLEY, ye pee <131" 


creation; a man wlio. has great plantations down here in Virginia, 
_ must be a very weak candidate, indeed, if he cannot come to Con- 
gress in an off year on almost any issue. [Laughter.] 

Mr. Scorr. I have been a Democrat all my life; and in a Presi- 
_ dential year I was elected to this House in a district which gave Mr. 
Blaine 6,000 majority, and gave me 900. [Applause.] 

i Mr. MoKINuey. Iam very glad if the gentleman made the issue. 
_ on free trade; but if he did, he is the only man in the North who did 
so. And whien he was elected in 1884, he had not voted for the Mor- © 
_ rison bill; had you? [addressing Mr. ScorT.] 

Be Mr. Scort. Yes, sir. 

Mr. McKinury. Did you vote for the Morrison bill before 1884? 
- Mr. Scorr. I voted for the Morrison bill before my people elected 
- me for my second term. 

_ Mr. McKinutey. But you had not done s0 before being elected 
_ the first time. 

‘Mr. Scott. No, sir. 

Mr. McKInLEy. You were boasting of the immense majority 
you had in 1884, when Mr. Blaine was a candidate. 

Mr. Scotr. No. The gentleman from Ohio said that I was 
elected in an “‘off year.” Ireplied that I had been a Democrat all 
iy life, and that in a Presidential campaign, when Mr. Blaine car- 
ried my district by 6,000 majority, I was elected by a majority of 
: : 900; and at the next élection, after I had voted for the Morrison bill, - 
~ Tearried the district by double the majority that I had received be- 
_ fore. [Applause on the Democratic side. ] 

~ -‘Mr. McKintry. What I cannot understand is this: If the gentle- 
man’s district believes in free trade and is against protection, how 
_ did it happen to give 6,000 majority for Mr. Blaine? [Applause. ] 
Go back to the people and ask to be returned on this bill and the 
 President’s message; do not dodge or equivocate, but stand up to the 
issue squarely ; make your platform in Connecticut the same as in 
_ the Carolinas, in New York and New Jersey, the same as Mississippi 
~ and Georgia; and then if your majority is returned you will be com- 
_ missioned to adopt this bill or something like unto it, abandoning the 
_ American for the British policy. [Applause.] The details at this 
time can be of little moment. This bill points to the overthrow of 
the protective system; that is its tendency and mission. 

It is the system which is on trial; not one item or one schedule of 
_ the tariff, but the principle upon which the whole rests. Nothing 
_ which that side of the House can do or will do touching the tariff 
oa can be other than hurtful. If it corrected a single abuse or inequality 
; or incongruity it will be at the expense and sacrifice of many great 


sca 


182 WILLIAM M‘KINLEY, JR. 


interests. It is destruction, not correction you are after. When é e 
your bill levels at all it levels down. When it equalizes articles be- 


longing to the same group and family, representing the same raw ~ t 


material and the same amount of labor, its equality is with the lowest. 
It does not help that which bears the lowest duty, but destroys that 


which bears the highest. It injures the whole that it may put the — , 


whole upon the same footing. It gives no consideration or protec- 
tion to a single home industry or American product, except probably 
cotton and rice. It puts no languishing American industry on its 
feet; it sets in motion no idle spindles; it starts no new fires; it 
creates no increased demand for labor; if an industry»is down it 
keeps it there; its very breath is paralyzation; it injures what it 
touches and touches that it may injure. [Great applause. | 

If the tariff needs revision—and in some particulars revision — 
would improve it—it must be done by its friends and in full recog- 
nition of the principle of protection. It mustbe done by a party with 
courage enough to raise duties if needed and reduce them if unneces- 
sarily high, and with wisdom enough to foresee and provide against 
redundant revenue, and in correcting inequalities, prudent enough to 
inflict no injury upon any, but bring good to all. That is the cor- 
rection of inequalities to which the Republican party pledged itself. 
in itsnational platform of 1884, and for the fulfillment of which it 
has not since then had a majority in the House to enforce. If it had 
it would have long ago been done. It will doit when itis again in 
control. Not correction which destroys, but which makes simple, 
harmonious, and equitable all of the provisions of the tariff. 

It is fortunate that our Government is founded upon the consent 
of the governed, that every citizen has a voice in making and ~ 
unmaking the House of Representatives every two years, andeven — 
if he is deprived in the interim of a hearing there is one day when 
he can speak and vote and make his influence felt [applause]; 
for I tell you, if the workmen were without the ballot we would 
have free trade within twelve months, and their protests and 
ours would be as idle as the wind which none of us heed. Fortu- 


t 


nately for them they have a vote, and if they fail to use it for their — 2 


homes and their firesides and their families they will show much 
less manhood, independencé, intelligence, and righteous resentment 


than I am sure they possess. It was the ballot in the hands of labor — : 
to be used next November which kept coal and iron ore from being __ 


placed on the free-list in this bill, and unless the majority is reversed 
in this body and the Fifty-first Congress placed under Republican ~ 
control these products, with others of equal importance, will be 
stricken from the dutiable and placed upon the free-list, This is 


= Capek 
ai 


wy ae. ¢ OR a PS ee EW TAN sci) ee AA Oe 
1 ea eT eS 
apy Me ce Ot 


be 


bossy MEINLBY, IR (8 7 133 


only the initial step. The chairman of the committee has 80 
declared. Listen to his words found in his opening speech: 


We should lay taxes to obtain revenue, but not restrict importations. 


_* * * We should place every material of manufacture on the free-list. * * * 


This is the proclamation made by the premier of this body; this. 
is in direct line with the President’s message; this is the plan, the 
_ policy, and the purpose of the Democratic party. The elections once 
- safely over, the party now in control again invested with power, 
- and the work will go on to the end. The Democratic patriots and 
-protectionists must get out of the way. Even Democrats who 
_ believe that protection is ‘‘a local issue,” and as such worth main- 
‘taining, must not further interrupt the procession. You saw an 


exhibition of the spirit this morning [laughter], when the generous 
courtesy of my friend from Kentucky [Mr. Breckinridge] saved his 


. party from a most unfortunate embarrassment. The hope of 


the country, is in the ballot. The future, and, as I conceive, 


Ma the welfare and progress of the Republic, the future condition 
ti of the wage-earners depends upon the issue to be settled in 


November. American citizens who love their country must be on 


: - guard on that day of supreme concern; it is their day, their one 
great opportunity. Parties must be subordinated to the great 


interests of the masses. No party necessity is great enough to force 
_ its adherents against its country’s best interests. I care not what 
in the future may be the party name which stands for this system, 
8 which stands for the people, I will follow its flag under whatever 
_ designation or leadership, because it is my country’s flag and repre- 
- sents its greatness and its glory. [Long and continued applause 
__ and cries of ‘ Vote!”] | 


HON. WILLIAM L. WILSON, 


OF WEST VIRGINIA. 


(Democratic Side.) 


It has been said by every gentleman who has spoken against this 
bill that it raises the issue of free trade or protection in our revenue — 
system. It would disclose a better understanding of its very moder- ~ 
ate provisions, as also a better knowledge of the recent fiscal history — 
of the country, to say that it is an effort of the people to recover the © 
lost right of taxing themselves. a 

The great rule that those who pay taxes, and they alone, should — 
impose taxes may, always and everywhere, be accepted as the test _ 
of free government. But after a quarter of a century of protection — 
in this country, private interests are so strongly intrenched in our ~ 
tariff and have so overgrown public interests, that they regard it as _ 
their exclusive domain and resent the intrusion of the people as that S 
of trespassers. : 

In this tone and in this assumption they speak in their communi- 
cations to Congress. In this tone and in this assumption they speak — 
through the powerful press they control, and even through their — 
able and enthusiastic advocates on this RODE. oa 

Already in this debate gentlemen have les the census to — 
ascertain how many private interests are represented by. the mem- ~ 
bers who framed this bill, in order thereby to test their right and — 
gauge their fitness to deal with a system of general taxation. . 

But these are not new ideas in this House. Six years ago, ~ 
when there came from the people such a demand for reduction of — 
_ burdens that not even a Republican Congress could turn a deaf ear — 
to it, we saw a sight as remarkable as any that could be witnessed — 
in a free government. We saw the chairman of the Committee on — 
Ways and Means come into the House, not with a bill to reduce the — 
people’s taxes or to stay the unneeded flow of money into the ~ 
Treasury, but with a set and elaborate argument to prove that the 3 
people’s Representatives were incapable of framing such a bill. o 

That Congress responded to his argument. It turn seer t a 

134 


BAe neh, SF 


WILLIAM L. WILSON. — 185 


the ereat protected interests enthroned in the tariff and said, ‘‘ We, 
_who represent nothing but the people, will not presume to deal with 
_your superior rights. We will hand over this whole subject t® a com- 
mission, and when you have named a majority of that commission, 
and through it made known your wishes to us, we will do our duty 
_by enacting them into law.” But privilege grows with what it feeds 


-upon. It is ever assuming a higher tone. The time was when the © 


_ test of loyalty to the country was devotion to the Union in the 
struggle for its preservation. Lately, at the other end of this 
- Capitol, the highest official of a great political party has declared 
that even a McClellan and a Hancock were allies of the Confederacy 

_ because they were disloyal to that party. But in this House and in 

_ this debate another test has been set up. We have heard the name 

_ of an American citizen, who stands before the world as the foremost 


living representative of American literature, who has an honorable * 


and unsullied record of public service, and whose words, in days 
past, were ‘‘battles” for freedom—we have heard his name, coupled 
_ with that of Benedict Arnold, because he refuses to bow down before 
the fetich of protection. 
‘ My colleague on the Committee on Ways and Means, the gentle- 
-man from Michigan [Mr. Burrows], whose speech naturally gave 
gteat satisfaction to his party associates, inveighed with more 
- warmth of language than accuracy of statement against this bill and 
_ against the manner of its preparation. Indeed, he was swept so far 
out on the current .of his eloquence from any shore-lines of actual 
3 * fact, as to proclaim that this bill comes into the House without ac- 
mowledged paternity, that it is a bantling, a nullius filius, secretly 
laid at the door of the Committee on Ways and Means, and by the 
majority of that committee transferred to the Calendar of the 
House. 
The gentleman has no warrant for any such statement. Neither in 
- the committee nor elsewhere, neither now nor at any other time, 
have the majority members refused to assume whatever responsibil- 
_ ity belongs to the preparation and presentation of this bill, from its 
enacting clause to its closing sentence. They do not offer it to the 
_ House as a bill so perfect in all its details that thorough debate and 
consideration here may not show cause for amendment or change. 
_ Least of all do they offer it as a discharge of their full duty to the 
_ people, but as the best they could do under existing conditions. 


HISTORY OF EXISTING LAW, 


_ When the gentleman from Michigan and his associates seek to dis- 
_ credit this bill because of the alleged manner of its preparation I am 


136 “WILLIAM L. WILSON. 


tempted to remind them of the history of the existing law, for whose 

defense they stand so stoutly to-day. : oa 
There was a time, doubtless, when the highest statesmanship was 

to get money into the Treasury as quickly and as abundantly as pos- 


sible. There was a time when the highest patriotism was to pay __ 
taxes as promptly as possible and ask no questions. Under this pres- 
sure an internal-revenue system grew up that in a single year 
brought over $300,000,000 into the Treasury. Under this pressure the 
tariff rates went up from’an average of less than 19 per cent. to an 
average of more than 48 per cent. It would have been strange in- 
deed, contrary to all experience, if the greedy interests that are — 
always seeking a lodgment in a national budget or a national tariff 

had missed this rare opportunity. That they were fully improving 

it was well known to those who had charge of the several revisions 

and increases of the tariff during the war, for they lulled the people 
with the promise that as soon as peace returned they would revise 

and establish it on a basis of justice to all. 

Yet for years after the war, and as long as the attention of the 
people was strained to other matter, the tariff was kept open forany - 
interest or industry that wished to become a parasite on the Treas- 
ury. Such interests were not only allowed to name the bounties 
they exacted from the public, but permitted to write the very laws 
_ by which their bounties were secured to them. 

‘‘T know what that law means,” said Mr. Joseph Wharton, testi- 
fying before the Tariff Commission in 1882, as to the statute that 
raised the duty on nickel, of which he was about the only producer 
in the country, from 15 per cent. ad valorem to 30 cents a pound, 
‘because I wrote the words of it myself.” In like manner owners 
of the copper-mines of Michigan came down and dictated their tariff 
rates over the veto of President Johnson; and other interests exer- 
cised the same privilege without challenge and without hinderance. 

But, say gentlemen, ‘‘ We have had a revision of the tariff since 
then.” What kind of a revision was it? It is true the Tariff Commis- 
sion in 1882 reported in favor of substantial reduction, and accom- 
panied its report by schedules which professed to reduce from 20 to — 
25 per cent. I will not inquire into the truth of that profession, for 
the House threw aside those schedules and attempted toframea 
tariff bill of its own. It became lost in the effort; it plunged into — 
the , 


Su eee-¥ 9 ee 


ar ie 


RR ee ee et 


Serbonian bog, 
Where armies whole have sunk, 
and finally abandoned the attempt and at the same time its own 
constitutional right and duty. It took up a tariff bill which the 


pie WILLIAM 2 Le WHSON. Adee 137 


Senate had aiaohed to a House bill vance internal revenue. The 


right of the Senate to originate such a measure is more than doubt- 
ful; but constitutional questions could not weigh against the 
necessity of having the tariff revised by the ‘‘friends of protection.” 


~ The friends of protection in that House were smarting under the lash 
of popular chastisement. They had already been overthrown at the 


polls by a verdict of the people so spontaneous and crushing as to 
evince not only disapproval but even disgust. In a few days 


more a Democratic House was to succeed them. Whatever was to 


be done must be done quickly. The standing rules of the House 
were changed so as to permit the Senate bill to be taken up, not for 


_debate or consideration, but to be thrown into a conference com- 


mittee. The key to the whole proceedings is found in the fact that 
a conference committee is a secret conclave. No Democratic 
Senator was willing to serve upon that conference, and all the 
conferrees, with the exception of one member of the House, who was 
present to observe, not to participate, were of one party. Into the 


_ deliberations of that conference no voice of a tax-paying people could 


penetrate, but other voices were heard and obeyed. Rates of duty 


which both Houses had agreed upon were raised. Rates which the 
two Houses had placed at different figures were increased over both. 


The duty on steel rails was put higher than the House in open 
session had dared to place it, higher than the Senate in open session 


had dared to place it. The conferencereport was made in theclosing | 
hours of the Forty-seventh Congress. The bill was never read in 


the House, but was slightly debated, and was hurried upon the 
statute-book as almost the last act of a House going out under the 


_. brand of a people’s displeasure. 


There is all the distance, which even the rich vocabulary of my 


- colleague from Michigan [Mr. Burrows] could measure between a bill 
_ prepared in secret, if he will so have it, and then sent out to all the 


people on the wings of the press and subjected to months of discus- 
sion in both Houses of Congress, and a law huddled up in the secret 
recesses of a conference room and transferred without discussion, 
and without examination by the people, to the statute-books of the 
country. [Applause.] And thus, the so-called revision of 1882, 
instead of being an argument against the present bill, is a burning 
reason in its favor. It is instructive only as it shows how greata — 
sham and how desperate and audacious a jugglery a revision of the © 

tariff necessarily becomes when committed to the ‘‘ friends of protec- 


tion.” The effort to reduce taxes became a contest among the 
_ captains of industry for higher bounties. The poor, patient, expect- 


ant people got no relief. The saddle was adjusted more skillfully to 


ae igi 4 iv a) I tee KIT RUA Ts ADS Ann Boh ye tha abity SMCs Crake © tty Aah 


shee? haat 
ee ( 


the back, the girth was tightened, and the rider more firmly seated 
than ever. 


REPUBLICAN BOAST OF REDUCTION. 


But the minority of our committee in their report boast that the 
Republican party has removed more than $300,000,000 of taxes from 
the people since the war. That may be true, sir, and still be not the 
least in the catalogue of sins of that party against the great body of 
the people. It is true they have reduced taxes; it is true they have 
abolished taxes; but it has been done in the manner described by my 
colleague from Texas [Mr. Mills]. They have taken off taxes that 


bore on the property of the country. They have taken off taxes that 


tolled the income of the prosperous or the dividends of corporations. 
They have removed taxes on articles whose use is unnecessary or 
hurtful, and they have released taxes whose entire amount went into 
the Treasury. By such legislation in the first ten years of peace, the 
immense burdens of this great Government weére steadily shifted 
from the shoulders that ought to bear them and are able to bear them 
to shoulders that ought not to bear them and are not able to bear 
them. In this manner we haveseen the pressure of taxation in this 
country removed from its income, removed from its property, re- 
moved from its luxuries, and fastened upon those articles of general 
consumption that meet the primary wants of all the people. You 
have fastened -your system of taxation as a parasite upon that con- 
sumption which for the wage-earner means nine-tenths and fre- 
quently ten-tenths of all his earnings, until you have built up a tariff 
which is well entitled to say, ‘‘ Whoever else escapes my exactions, 
the poor I have always with me.” [Laughter and applause on the 
- Democratic side. ] Z 

There is nothing in the world that so vexes the soul of a genuine 

protectionist as a tax that goes into the public Treasury. If he can- 

not devise a law by which to transfer a large part of it from the 
pockets of the man who earned it to somebody’s pockets who did not 
earn it, he never rests satisfied until he has wiped it from the statute- 
book [applause]; and that is the way in which our friends on the 
other side have proceeded in their so-called reductions of taxes since 
the war. 

It is not my purpose to discuss the details of this bill at the pres- 
ent time, That discussion will more properly come at another stage 
ofits consideration. I adopt the language of thé President in his re- 
cent message, that it is not so much a theory as a condition that con- 
fronts us to-day, although I avow myself a believer in the words 
which old Patrick Henry wrote into the Virginia bill of rights, enjoin- 


Nii Meta Ra gh ice aie oh lin een ih tT ae 
“188° | “WILLIAM TL. WILSON, = 


; 
a 
v 
3 


ese 5 se tbear iota) Ce Te a he Maine, Bee ea LE UE Pee ait b. SIP SLOTS ARE cers ll we 


ing on the servants of the people a ‘‘ frequent recurrence to first prin- 
ciples.” It is a condition of prolonged, excessive taxation; of a sur- 
plus flowing into the Treasury which can be gotten out again only 
by using it to buy the bonds of the Government at the market pre- 
mium; of a surplus that by the end of the present fiscal year, with- 
out such purchase, will drain away from the channels of trade and 
commerce one-tenth part of all the money usually in circulation 
among the people. 


REPUBLICAN METHODS WITH SURPLUS. 


That is the condition which confronts us to-day, and, as in the 
past, so now there is no statesmanship on the other side of this House 
that can meet it. Acknowledging an allegiance higher than that 
which they owe the people in framing a tariff system, they stadd help- 
less before the great task of tariff reduction. Even in their ‘debates 
here they are ‘‘many men of many minds.” 


WILLIAM L. WILSON. : 139 


ee. 
Fale 


% 
,* 


Some would untax the whisky of the drunkard and put — 


heavier taxes on the scanty clothing of his wife and children. Others 


would give untaxed cigarettes to sap the manhood and drain away 


. the brains of our young men, while they would raise the taxes on the 


workingman’s dinner-pail and the cans that contain his winter fruit 
and vegetables. 

The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Kelley], after pleasantly 
alluding to his Democratic associates on the committee as ‘‘ Bour- 


bons, who neither learn nor forget,” by a singular lapse of memory 


only a few moments afterward announced that he would deal with 
the surplus ‘‘in accordance with the principles of Colbert and of his 


_ illustrious disciple, Napoleon Bonaparte.” 


Why, Colbert was the great minister of the greatest of all the 


= Bourbons, and neither Colbert nor Napoleon is a teacher to whom the 


citizen of a free republic can turn for instruction either as to laying 


or expending taxes. It was Colbert, sir, who built up the navy of 
his royal master by chaining thousands of innocent Frenchmen to the 


galleys, just as protection has built up privileged classes and monop- 


oly in this country by chaining millions of American workingmen 
and farmers to its service. [Applause on the Democratic side.] 
And, sir, it was Colbert who defined the art of taxation ‘‘to consist 


in so plucking the goose as to get the largest amount of feathers — 


with the least possible amount of squealing.” [Laughter.] Never in > 


the history of economic discussion has there been an apter or a more 
complete definition of a protective tariff. [Applause on the Demo- 
cratic side. ] 

But lL assure my friend from Pennsylvania that the goose is squeal: 


an ae “a RS he ae ioe Dis St ay er eee ges 
140. oe ‘WILLIAM L. WILSON. 


i 


ing at last, and we mean to keep the goose squealing until every | 
faithless and sleeping sentinel on the Capitol is awakened to drive — 
back the Gauls of monopoly. [Laughter and applause on the Demo- 
cratic side. | 


PROPHECIES OF EVIL. 


Protection, as it speaks to us from across the aisle, does not rea- 
son; it prophesies. I have listened to many of its advocates, and I 
have heard scant argument and much prophecy. There is nothing 
original in this. Privilege was never yet summoned to release a 
tribute paid to it by the people that it did not assurhe the réle of Cas- 
sandra and prophesy unutterable woes if the industries of the people a 
were released from its grasp and remitted to the laws of tradeand the iq 
wisdom of Providence. [Applause on the Democratic side.] These | 

_ gentlemen who would blot out the sun, moon, and stars from our in- 
dustrial firmament if this bill becomes a law might quiet their fears 
if they would read a few chapters in the economic history of this ; 
country and of England. j 

More than sixty years ago, when England entered upon that 
career of industrial emancipation which she faithfully pursued toits 
full and final issue, she began by removing her prohibitory tariffon  —_— 
manufactures of silk and reducing duties. A member of the House 7 4 
of Commons, amid just such ringing applause as greets similar  — 
utterances in this debate, said that if the authors of that bill were 
prepared to sacrifice half a million of people to an abstract theory, 
their strength of purpose only showed the depravity of their hearts. 
But the manufacture of silks did not die. In the ratio in which ~ 
duties were reduced, in that ratio the manufacture grew and 
flourished, and when finally duties were entirely abolished and it no — 
longer cowered behind a protective tariff, it went boldly forth and 
contended for the markets of the world. When, as a further step in — 
that progress, the time came for England to put wool on the free-list, 
there were prophesyings that would stir the envy of the wool politi- 
cians of Ohio in our day. It was solemnly foretold that if that ~ 
measure became a law the wolf and the wild boar would roam un- 

_hindered over the hills then dotted with peaceful flocks. But the 
wool industry refused to die. With free wool it assumed new life 
and vigor. The price of wool increased and the wages of the shep- 
herd doubled. 

But when a little later England was about to declare for untaxed 
bread for her people, prophecy rose to its highest strain, and de-— 
clared that the ‘‘ abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the 
prophet” was about to blight the green fields and prosperous homes 


Te tade wetter ee eee 8g eS OY ial. Seen SS Re ae ee tel 


Be Se $ } j >) 
"aa ae oe 
Be Me Ba se J” ae 


che a 
BOP FP 


FNS EEN, ee Se 
v4 See 


| WiLLTam L. WILSON. ee 141 


Se England. An En elish statesman, Sir James Graham, Sk to 


a 1 deputation that pleaded for free corn, said: 


If the corn laws were repealed great disaster would come upon the country, 


‘The land would go out of cultivation, the church and state could not be up- 
held; all institutions would be reduced to their primitive elements, and the — 
‘people we were exciting would pull down our houses about our heads, 


But England put.corn on the free-list; and agriculture, which 


with all the doctoring of thirty years of protective statesmanship 


had languished and weakened, took up its bed and walked—flour- 
ished as it had not flourished since the Napoleonic wars. The price 


of land went up, the farmer. prospered, and the wages of the farm- 


laborer increased, 


PROTEOTIONISTS FALSIFY OUR HISTORY. 
So, also, when the protectionist comes down from the mount of 


_ prophecy and attempts to deal with the facts of history (for cer- 


tainly there are some chapters in our economic history that are 
made up), he deals with them in the same free and irresponsible 


' Manner. 


- We have had twenty-five years of protection in this country, and 
the fruits of it. We have had fifteen years of revenue tariff and the 
fruits of it. Thelast quarter of a century, as every one knows, has 
been noted beyond any other period in the history of our race for 


\ - the general advancement and diffusion of knowledge; for the march 
of science; for the progress of invention; for the subjection to man’s 
control of the great powers of steam and electricity; for the cheap- 


ening of the processes of manufacture, and for the immense increase 


in the facilities of distribution. Whatever we have gained of our- 
selves, or in common with other enlightened nations of the world; 


whatever addition to national wealth or individual comfort has come 


from this march of progress; from the application of science to the 


arts and industries, and especially of the science of chemistry, which 
has become the handmaid of manufactures, which discloses to us the 


secrets of nature’s workshop, dissolves and recombines her elements, 


and finds in the waste products of manufactures sources of beauty 
and sources of wealth; whatever the inventive genius of our people ~ 


_ has done to substitute labor-saving machinery for human drudgery; 
whatever of wealth has come to us from our own industry and enter- | 


prise, and the settlement of a new continent by men coming from 


other lands to live under free government; the products of our 
mines and forests; all these protection calmly claims as its own, 


142 | WILLIAM L WILSON. 3 


althovgh it has had nothing more to do with ‘He than with 


the motion of the planets or with the tides of the seas. [Applause. Flin 
But those peculiar features in the economic history of our country - 
_during the past twenty-five years for which it is just to hold pro- 


tection fully or partly responsible it conveniently puts aside and i 


ignores. 
Professing to be a policy for the making and maintenance of 


wages, it tells us nothing of the growing antagonism between labor — f3 


and capital, that has marked the recent history of our country; of 
the unsatisfactory relations between employer and employed; of the — 
long industrial depressions; of the twenty and odd thousand strikes, 
and the twenty and odd hundred lockouts in our industrial estab- 
lishments during the past six years alone, with the resulting loss of 
$60,000,000 in wages to labor; of the building up of great wealth by 


favoritism, which tries to hold on to its privileges by corrupting the 
ballot-box and intimidating voters; of the centralization of manu- 
factures into a few great corporations, and the recent combination 


of these into trusts. Of all these we hear nothing in our discussions. 


We hear nothing of its compelling Congress for years past te 


legislate in the presence of an overflowing Treasury until the tradi 


tions of frugality which are a part of our institutions are relaxed 


and our Calendars are filling with schemes for extravagant and use- 
less expenditure. It imposes humiliation upon its most faithful 


defenders, for it compels the party on the other side of this House, ~ a 


which held control of every branch of the Government for ten years ~ 9 
after the war, and again for the period of the Forty-seventh Con- 


gress, to admit that in all that time it failed to enact just and hers 
pension laws, and that such laws yet remain to be passed. 


It seeks to sap the independence and stifle the rising power aud a 


willingness of the South to maintain its local. schools by offering 
largesses from the public Treasury. 
It seeks to frighten our great cities on the seaboard with three 


thousand miles of water before them and sixty millions of defenders _ ee 
_ behind them, to clamor for great fortifications, lest they be laid in 
ashes by the nightly visit of some ironclad from Chili, Patagonia, = 


Afghanistan, or Beloochistan. 


It urges the restoration of our merchant marine, which it has a 


helped to sweep from the seas, by subsidies, that word of evil omen — 
in a republic, contact with which has never failed to bring shame 
upon Congress and a stain upon our national honor. 


Such are some of the fruits of twenty-five years of protection; — : ] 
such are some of the ideas with which it is educating our people; _ 
such is the career of profligate expenditure along which it is urging te 


ar 


— ae 


ee a ae ye 


us - in order to escape any reduction of taxes which ays work a 
lessening of its bounties. 


Thus, also, when it comes to deal with the fifteen years ‘ot our 


revenue tariff it does not hesitate to represent the period from 1846 
to 1861 as one of languishing industry and halting growth. In so 


_ doing it contradicts the most incontestable facts of our industrigl 
- history, and it falsifies that careful record which the country itself 
_ makes, every ten years, of its own growth and prosperity. 


Senator Morrill, of Vermont, whose name is associated with exist- 


: ing tariff systems, in his speech in the Senate on April 11, said: 


_ State have just put forward with much enthusiasm as theircandidate 


There is no one who now rises to do reverence to the tariff of 1846. 


But Senator Allison, of Iowa, whom his party friends in that 


¥ for the Republican nomination for the Presidency, once a leading 
- member of the Committee on Ways and Means in this House, and as 
well qualified to judge of our revenue legislation as any man in his 
party, gave it as his deliberate judgment, in a debate in this House 


_ March 24, 1874, that— 


The tariff of 1846, although professedly and confessedly a revenue tariff, 


- was, so far as regards all the great interests of the country, as perfect a tariff 
as any we have ever had. 


Such I believe will be the judgment of every man who believes 
that in tariff, as in other legislaticn, the great interests of the country 


and the general welfare are to be considered in preference to special 


interests and individual welfare. [Applause.] Mr. Morrill further 
said: 
~ Meaning the tariff of 1846— 


a left manufactures without encouragement and without hope, the wages of 


_ labor were reduced, and much capital suddenly destroyed. 


But the census of 1860 shows an increase in the decade of the 


q Walker tariff of 90 per cent. in capital, 60 per cent. in wages, and 85 
per cent. in product, as against an increase of 32 per cent. in capital, 


92 per cent. in wages, and 27 per cent. in product, for the decade 
- ending with the census year 1880, under the present tariff. 


Moreover, Mr. Morrill himself, on January 24, 1867, in plain con- 


_ flict with his recent argument, speaking of the year 1860, said: 


And that was a year of as large production and as much general prosperity 


~ as any in our history. 


It was not after fifteen years of languishing industries and general 


Meese OR eae OOP NE ea eC 


vi 2 2ey. WR: Bitte aes on oe Aah SAGs aay hotell a is OS SEE RAS te a a OR in oe > 

s vi = Eas ree Sg TIS Sen: Pwr Tt ae pitnay > Settee eM te 1 Mong aS 
~ eines Tbs 9 Bees NOR ee Le 4k Cate oe VM aie nS eae Fi, , 

‘ pape ; : : mm 


American labor!” 


144 


WILLIAM L. WILSON. 


Pankeapuey that the two sections of this country sprang into tho top 
arena of 1861 for the dread grapple of the civil war. Mc 

My colleague from Pennsylvania [Mr. Kelley] used the same ar-— 
gument in his recent speech, and said that twenty-five years of pro- 
tective tariff lifted the country out of the national bankruptcy into 
whith it: had been thrown by the revenue tariffs of 1846 and 1857. I 
say to him, in the name of a tax-burdened people, in the name of the 
languishing industries of this country, get out of our sunshine, and 
‘let us again plunge into ten years of bankruptcy that will increase 
the general wealth of the country 126 per cent. [applause]; that will 
increase manufactures 87 per cent.; that will increase agriculture 95 _ 
per cent. [Applause.] We have had no such prosperity since his 
ideas controlled tariff legislation, and we never will as long as those 
ideas hold sway in our revenue laws. 


WAGES OF LABOR. 


I now come to the claim put forward. with most earnestness in 
this debate that the tariff is the defense of American labor, and the 
one guaranty of good wages and prosperity to the American laboring 

man. This is an honorable claim and deserves serious consideration. 
I should deem myself guilty of a flagitious crime if I entertained any 
‘views in private or sought to embody any principles in legislation 
that would harden the lot or impair the opportunities of Reps ee ny 
labor. 

But how do the advocates of high taxation support this claim? 4 
Why, they stand up in this House, day after day, and paint in ~ 
glowing colors, which I am sorry to say do not always portray the 
real facts, the high estate and happy condition of the American 
laborer, his good and steady wages and ready accumulation of 
wealth, and his easy path upward to influence and prosperity; and 
then they draw with greater exaggeration of detail their gloomy 
pictures of foreign labor, its degradation, scant wages, and almost 
unendurable destiny, and exclaim, ‘‘ Behold what the tariff does for 


It is true, and I thank God it is true, that the American laboring C - 
man is born to a higher and a better destiny than the laboring man _ 
of any other country in the world. [Applause.] It is true that we 
have never yet hada separate wage-earning class in this country. 
It is true that there is no pressure of ignorance or poverty so great 
that an ambitious American youth cannot break through and rise to 
any position to which his worth entitles him. It is true that we seo 
to-day a man who has risen from orphanage and poverty to the Chief 


+ Pant we 
ne em | ne %, 


WILLIAM L. WILSON. “ 145 


_ Magistracy of sixty millions of people; that in the past men have so 
risen from the weaver’s loom, the tailor’s bench, and the canal-boat; 

and I rejoice as an American cit etl that the same inspiring career is 
still open to ambition and merit. But they did not owe this to any 
such antiquated and medizval device as a protective tariff. [Applause 


on the Democratic side.] They owe it to the bounty of Almighty 


God and to the institutions of a great and free: country. [Renewed 


applause.| They owe it to the manhood, the pluck, the ambition . 
‘and virtue with which their Creator endowed them and to the un- © 


equaled field for their display which the institutions of their country 
secure them. [Renewed applause. | 

I should but follow with imping gait the vigorous and masterly 
step of the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means were I 
to detain the Committee of the Whole with an attempted discussion 
of the question of wages. His opening speech embodied a careful — 
and complete discussion of the whole subject. I shall aspire to noth- 
ing more than the statement of a few general principles, and their — 


confirmation by an authority or two. Wages are better in America 


and will remain better in America, not by reason of a protective 


- tariff, or any other kind of a tariff, but because the workingman him- 


self earns more than the laborer of any other country. [Applause.] 
Some of the reasons for this are that he brings to his work a more 
vigorous body, a more cheerful and ambitious temper, a higher order 


- of intelligence and of skill, and because he surpasses all other men in 


his constant efforts to invent labor-helping machinery whereby the 
products of his labor are indefinitely multiplied. This last is a mat- 


ter of common observation among ourselves, and of constant wonder 
- to other people. The Superintendent of our last census has said: 


The American invents as the Greek chiseled, as the Venetian painted, as the ~ 
modern Italian sings. 


The commissioner-general of the United States at the last Paris 
exposition reported that the new labor-saving inventions in our 
machinery gallery ‘‘were a constant surprise and delight to the 
visitors from other lands.” 

The whole argument on the other side is based on a comparison of 
daily wages. It is nota question of daily wages, but of the cost of 


- production which is to determine our ability to compete with other 
nations in our own markets or those of the world. It is not the daily 


wages of labor, but the productivity of labor, if I may use a wordI | 
do not altogether like, that is the vital element in the discussion. 
American labor, as a rule, is able to produce more, and for that 


reason does receive more wages than other labor, but this does not 


fe Sa Le arate Utars tv ee A See Eres Pik Fiat Ua Dna a Percy es PL Wate Ni yal NE asec ce Ibe ar ROA Seca ac aie Sl Sk 
is 5 4» y 2 , * 


cas Seat eae Bae Jet a a ete a 


ie ea WILSON. 


imply that with us the labor cost of production is highas than shee 
where. 
| Wages have increased in this country, but OE in fli ratio in 
which the productive power of labor has increased. These proposi- 
tions are abundantly confirmed by those who have most thoroughly 
investigated this subject. I shall cite the testimony of bu: one or 
“two, 
Tam aware that it is part of the tactics of our friends 6n the 
other side to discredit every man who tries to reach general princi- 
ples as a theorist and doctrinaire. To attempt to apply general 


principles in every other field of legislation is commended as states- 


manship, but in the great field of taxation it becomes, in their eyes, 
mere theory and college professorism. There is no gentleman, in 
my judgment, more entitled to a hearing upon this phase of the wage 
question than Mr. Edward Atkinson. Mr. Atkinson is a man of 
almost infinite industry, who to the capacity for gathering the most 
minute details adds a power of generalization that is broad and mas- 
_terly. Moreover, he has spent his whole life in immediate contact 

with the processes of production on a large scale. 
It is from the data thus gathered that he exposes the fallacy of 


the reasoning on the other side, that a comparison of the rate of — 


wages in different countries will ascertain the cost of production of 


any given article, or that low rates of wages are necessary to low 


cost of production, and establishes the fact that almost invariably 
high wages accompany a low cost of production, 


That labor— 
he says— 


has in fact proved to be the cheapest by which the largest product for each dol- 


lar expended was assured, and that has been the highest paid labor. 


General Francis A. Walker, whose discussions of the wage ques- 
tion are perhaps more satisfactory than those of any of our Ameri- 
can economists, confirms Mr. Atkinson by saying: 

That as a general rule low cost of production is accompanied by high wages 
to the workingman. 

T have here a little book by Mr. Thomas Brassey, of England, on 
_ Work and Wages. His conclusions are founded on the experience 
of his father, the great railroad contractor, who doubtless beyond 
any man that ever lived wasa hirer of labor in all parts of the world 
_ except in America, and who even in the unskilled work of building 
railroads found the English navvy as cheap at 3 shillings a day as the 
East Indian at 3 pence. I quote but a sentence or two: 


WILLIAM L. WILSON, 147 


But I maintain unhesitatingly that the daily wages are no criterion of the 


MN Ie PORN eck ROE ee Tae Ge Mee ee ee RS) ee RoE Fea 
4 LOR eS ; Sycitorv Beat oe Bese t rae . i 


actual cost cf executing work. * * * On my father’s extensive contracts — 


carried on in almost every country of the civilized world and in every quarter 
of the globe the daily wage of the laborer was fixed at widely different rates; 
but it was found to be the almost invariable rule that the cost of labor was the 
same, that for the same sum of money the same amount of work was everywhere 
performed. . | | 

_ The wages of labor are the laboring man’s share of the joint prod- 
uct of labor and capital. The larger that product is the larger his 
wages are. Why, my friend from Massachusetts [Mr. Allen] made 
a speech in this House yesterday in which, with his usual eloquence, 


he gave us a beautiful picture of the operatives at Lowell. I venture a 


to say that nine-tenths of the operatives at the Lowell factories are 

‘not Americans. They are foreigners who have taken the places of 
former American operatives, because the American operative has 
better wages and a better position. 


Mr. ALLEN (of Massachusetts). Will the gentleman allow me a 


a question? 

Mr. WiLson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. ALLEN (of Massachusetts). Suppose, for the sake of argu- 
ment, itis admitted those operatives are not American, and have 
succeeded in their position as operatives to those of American birth, 
the statistics will show that the people formerly employed in those 
factories are now employed in more useful avocations, and have been 
able, under the protective system, to accumulate sufficient savings 


~ 


ness. The gentleman from West Virginia surely does not object to 
that. The accumulated savings of those whom the gentleman de- 
nominates foreigners aggregate $14,000,000, almost equal to the ag- 


Republican side. | 

Mr. Witson. The very point I was making was that American 
labor, by its higher capacity, had found more lucrative employ- 
ment [applause], and that you have been obliged to send abroad into 
Canada and elsewhere to get labor to fill your factories. 

Mr. ALLEN (of Massachusetts). The American operative found 
that employment under the same protective tariff which has brought 
the others into this country, as shown by the statistics of the gentle- 


- while they were employed in those industries to go into other busi- — 


_gregate capital employed in those corporations. [Applause on the 


man from West Virginia, and the fact of those people coming in from 
abroad in large numbers indicates the collective judgment of indi- — 


_ viduals as to the welfare of this country under a protective tariff. 


Mr. Witson. But if, as my friend from Lowell and the other gen- 


i 


148 WILLIAM L. WILSON. 


tleman from Massachusetts contend, the protective tariff makes 
wages, what I cannot understand is how a law of Congress should 
operate so unequally and so unevenly. I have here in my hand an 
address delivered before the Home Market Club of New England, by 
Senator Frye, of Maine, on what he saw in Europe, in which, after 
the good old-fashioned protection logic, he pictures the wretched con- 
dition of European labor. Now the Home Market Club is composed 
largely of gentlemen who derive dividends from the present tariff, 
and who, naturally, do not want it disturbed. 
Mr. Morse. Exclusively. 


Mr. Witson. The preface of the address has a statement to 


show ‘‘the vast interest New England hasin a protective tariff,” and 
it gives the manufacturing statistics of all the New England States 
except Rhode Island. I do not know why they left her out unless it 
was because she hada Democratic governor at that time. [Laughter.] 

According to this statement here, the capital invested in those 
five States is $548,652,118, the number of employees 584,495; but 
when it comes to wages I find the average wages of an employee in 
the State of Maine to be $257 a year, whereas in the State of Massa- 


- chusetts he gets $364, and in the little State of Connecticut $385. 


Now, what I cannot understand is this: If a tariff, a law of Congress, 
makes wages, why does it operate so unevenly as between the em- 
ployé in Maine and the employé in Connecticut, and why is the 
Main man worth only two-thirds as much as the Connecticut man? 
And when we come to Vermont, the State of our venerable friend 
at the other end of the Capitol, I find that the average employé 
gets only $303. 

[Here the hammer fell. ] 

Mr. Wiuson. If a tariff does make wages, then the protect- 
ive tariff is the most ungrateful thing that ever existed in the 


history of the world. ‘Why should it give to the fellow-citizen 


and compatriot of the last Republican candidate for the Presi- 
dency only $257 a year, while it gives to the operative in the 


~ good old State that voted for the author of the last Presidential - 


message $385 a year? And why should it give to the fellow-citi- 


zen of the author of the tariff, Mr. Morrill, but $303 a year? That 
genial old Senator, who is in the habit of spicing his annual speech 


on the tariff with delightful scraps of poetry, ought to take as the 

motto for his next speech—‘‘ How sharper than a serpent’s tooth 

it is to have a thankless”—tariff! [Laughter and applause.] — 
The CHAIRMAN. The Committee of the Whole will be in order. 
Mr. Witson. But the statistics of the Home Market Club 


A: ae ; . 


okt Mines Ey OTe ey US, ne ae en 


i Sp hl ae ee Bee hs a sao At RIA BML dy yon Nae OM tee 


4 2 eee 


WILLIAM L. WILSON. eee 


are exactly in line with the figures oe in the report of 
the Commissioner of Labor. After careful inquiry into many 
industries in this country Colonel Wright says that ‘‘ An examina- 
tion of these reports te Snowe that there is no such thing as an 
American rate of wages.” For example, in the manufacture of 
agricultural implements a blacksmith gets 15 per cent. more in 
Illinois than in Indiana, while a foreman gets 50 per cent. more in 
Pennsylvania thanin NewYork, and a painter nearly 70 per cent. more 
in Pennsylvania than in Maine. In the boot and shoe industry a 
buffer gets $2.50 in Pennsylvania and only $1.40 in New York, which 
would clearly dispose of the Presidential boom of our late esteemed 
colleague [Mr. Hiscock], did we not find that a button-hole maker in 
Pennsylvania, if a woman, gets 78 cents, while New York pays $1.04. 
When it comes to heelers, New York gives $2.56 and Massachusetts 
only $1.72. But there is still hope for my friend from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Long] for the Presidential nomination, for Massachusetts pays 
her packers $1.95 while New York neglects hers with a cold $1.08. 
Mr. Witson. So when we come to the table of cotton goods 


we find that Great Britain pays mule-spinners $1.57, Massachu- 
setts $1.25, and Vermont only $1.20, and that the average rate 
,, of wages paid in the cotton industry in Great Britain is $1.17 per 


day, while in Vermont it is only $1.15; so that, when Senator Mor- 


rill became so alarmed for fear that his fellow-citizens were going to 


be reduced to the level of the pauper wages in England, it meant 


_simply that they were going to be kicked upstairs from $1.15 to $1.17, 
_the average wages in the cotton industry in England. 


Mr. Witson. My venerable colleague from Pennsylvania [Mr. 


Kelley], whom I am sorry not to see in his seat, was one of the con- 


ference committee in the Forty-seventh Congress which constructed 


_ the present tariff. In that committee they put up the duty on iron 


ore from 50 cents a ton, at which it had been fixed by the Tariff 


Commission, by the House i in open session, and by the Senate in open 
‘session, to 75 cents a ton, and all of course in the interest of and for 
the benefit of the Mnericad laboring man. 

Now, I have here Pennsylvania Legislative Documents for 
188485, volume 2, in which I find the twelfth annual report of the 
bureau of industrial statistics, by Joel C. McCamant. Speaking of. 


_ the wages of the iron-ore miners, he says: 


The mining of iron-ore does not afford constant employment, the average 
amounting to but thirty-six weeks per annum. This allows scarcely sufticient 


‘wages per week, for the run of the year, to maintain a single individual; how 
those wage-workers having families to maintain can accomplish that difficult 


task is a problem in-social economics that can be solved only by those who have 


oe 


been in similar circumstances. Many miners wear belts instead of suspenders 


to support the weight of their pantaloons; and one -of these, in reply to the 
question asked him relative to his ability to buy food, replied: ‘‘ Lord bless you, 
we do not always eat when we are hungry, we just tighten our belts.” 


[Laughter and applause. | 
Now, what has become of the 75 cents a ton which was secured 


for the American miner of iron ore in that conference? Why, up to — 


that date, May 1, 1885, more than two years afterward, had it not 
reached him? Is it lost, strayed, or. stolen? [Laughter and ap- 
plause. | 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Stolen. 


Mr. Witson. I suspect it has found its way into the literary 


bureau of the American Iron and Steel Association, has been expend- 

ed in the publication of tracts to prove to the miner what a good 

thing a protective tariff is for him. [Laughter and applause.] I 

would say to that philanthropic association, give your miners less 
_ tracts and better food under their belts. [Applause. ] 


DEMAND AND SUPPLY. 


But I must must hasten on. I fear I am already speaking beyond 
all reason. There is one great element in this question of wages that is 
carefully kept out of view. Gentlemen compare the wages and the 
condition of the American workman with those of his foreign com- 
petitor as if they stood upon an equality in other respects. They 
ignore the fact that in the labor market, as elsewhere, the law of de- 
mand and supply is the great regulator of prices. Where labor has 
many opportunities for employment wages are high; as these 
opportunities diminish wages are lessened. 

Now, contrast the position of the laborer in these United States 
with his position in the other countries of the world. The sixty mil- 

lion of people that now inhabit this country are but the vanguard of 
that mighty host which is destined to find homes, comfort, and pros- 
perity here. Not until the sixty millions become six hundred mil- 
lions, not until the six hundred millions grow into a thousand mil- 
ions, will men crowd each other here in the fierce struggle for exist- 
ence and wealth as they do in Great Britain to-day. [Applause.] 
And, small as Great Britain is, one-fifth part of the soil of the United 
Kingdom belongs to her House of Lords. Not one foot of land can 
her laborer hope to acquire as his own.. He is toa large extent a de- 
pendent on his employer. When discharged from her factories and 
mills he may well exclaim, ‘‘ Me miserable! which way shall I fly?” 
for a home of his own he can seldom hope to acquire. But the vast 


territorial extent of our country, the cheap and accessible lands, the 


wae 


Pre ee Sarit oe 


WILLIAM L. WILSON. 151 


free homesteads—these are the charter of freedom of our laborers 
against any dependence on any employer. You cannot compel the 
American workingman to toil for starvation wages as long as these 
avenues of escape are open to him—and if I were framing an in- 
dictment against the party on the other side of this House, I would 
say that the greatest crime against American labor that could be 
perpetrated was its taking from the workingman his heritage and 
the heritage of his children, the homestead offered by the laws of his 
country, and bestowingit upon railroad corporations. [Applause on 
the.Democratic side.] — 

The countries with which gentleman compare us are those of the 
Old World, crowded with population, burdened with debt, devoured 
by standing armies, and stratified by social distinctions wrought into 
their laws or into. unyielding customs. Centuries of class govern- 
ment have massed into privileged hands most of their wealth, of 
their lands, of their honors. Employment is in most cases a boon to 
the laborer, which he is expected to receive with due humility and 
thankfulness. Ours is a new country of free men under equal laws. _ 


Ours is a country in the making, where enterprise is always alert to 
~ achieve wealth and employ labor, where railroads are building—12,- 


000 miles in a single year—cities are springing up; where there are 


_ mines to explore, rivers to bridge, mountains to tunnel, forests to fell, 


and lands to subdue. - Everywhere we behold the energy and activity 
that belong to such an era in the life of a people, with all the demand 
and opportunity for labor that accompany it, and above all with that 
genuine respect for labor that is born of equal citizenship. 

No other people enjoy the same variety of climate and production, 
the same freedom of exchange and of movement over a great area. 
It is unfair, it is unpardonable, it is scarcely less than criminal for 
the beneficiaries under our tariff system to seek to intimidate the 
laboring men of this country into a support of their bounties, by 
telling them that they owe their superior condition not to these 
natural and moral advantages of their country, but to the protection 
of the tariff. ; . 


THE FARMER. 
But, there is one class of our laboring men as to whom these ad- 


_vocates of protection clearly see the difficulty and weakness of their — : 


position, and that is the American farmer. Where does the farmer 
get any benefit from protection? He is the patient beast of burden 
upon whose broad shoulders you have shifted down the chief 


~ burdens of supporting a Government of sixty millions of people, 
{Applause on the Democratic side. | 


at ey 


IN Se A nto ee Ey a as eer Sr Neos ener 
F 


152 WILLIAM L. WILSON. 


‘Where is the benefit to him under the tariff? My colleague from. 


Michigan [Mr. Burrows] meets the question with the bold reply: 
The farmer is not hurt. The consumer does not pay these taxes. 


And warming up with indignation because the President had ad- 
vanced a contrary idea in his message, declared with much emphasis 
and iteration that it was not true. Why, the merest child who 
stands behind a store box and sells candy for pins knows that if he 
does not get as much as it costs him he is in a losing business and 
will quickly give it up. 

The duty that is paid on a foreign article to get it into this country 
is as much a part of its original cost to the American consumer as 
the cost of its manufacture or of its ocean freight. No matter who 
the importer be, foreigner or fellow-citizen, if he does not get that 


- duty back in its sale he is in a losing business, as much as if he failed 


to get back any other element of cost. Trade stops at once if it 
brings no profit. Moreover, the amount thus added to its cost by 
the duty saves the home producer of a like article from having to 
compete with it at the cost it bore before the duty was added. I 
commend to the gentlemen on the other side the utterances of some 
of their party leaders on this point. 

Senator Sherman is an active candidate for the Presidency to- 
day, and I am glad to know that he has a higher idea of the intel- 
ligence of the farmer than my friend from Michigan, for he has said 
in this House: _ 

I said it, and I stand by it, that as a general rule the duties paid upon im- 
ports operate as a tax upon the consumer. 


Senator Edmunds, of Vermont, in the February number of 
Harper’s Magazine, in replying to Mr. Watterson, argued at length 
that the larger portion of import duties is borne by the foreign pro- 
ducer ; but Senator Edmunds, speaking on the tariff question, Janu- 
ary 4, 1883, made a much more correct statement when he said: 

In the main all these taxes come out of the consumer, particularly in- 
ternal-revenue taxes, perhaps all of them substantially. 

_. And I particularly commend to his colleagues on this floor the 
emphatic language of Senator Plumb, of Kansas, on the 11th Janu- 
ary, 1883, spoken with a directness and an earnestness that showed 
impatience of any contrary suggestion: | 

Who pays these taxes? When the manufacturer of iron comes to the 
Senate and says, ‘‘I can live, or I can make a profit, if a certain duty is im- 
posed,” what is he saying? He is simply saying, ‘‘If you give me a certain 


duty you put it in my power to charge over that duty as an additional taxon 


the farmers of the United States.” 


i eh oe! Sn -_ 
ez in ie PD 5 : >, he tea 
4 Vicker ee. ene “ieee a ye, Tatas, 
Be Cte Re teal. DAT Ay Ae 5 ee ees os % 
ieee me Sothys 5 2 
x . ' es TT 


penton COUN he ess RIOR, Bat ad Te UL oe UAB Ar oad, ake. 4g Aunt 


WILLIAM I. WILSON. : 158 


W The mere statement of this question, it seems to me, is its con- 

_ clusive argument, and I should not further refer to it but that the 

gentleman from Michigan so sharply criticised the President for 

_ °. expressing views like those of Mr. Sherman, Mr. Edmunds, and Mr. 

| Plumb, and in one of his most eloquent periods and with the ap- 

__plause of his party associates exclaimed that the very insensate pen 

4 with which the President wrote this folly should have said, ‘‘I am 
cheaper by one-half than before the duty was imposed.” And the 
very midnight oil of which the speech of the gentleman was so redo- 
lent might have responded: ‘‘I am a thousand per cent. cheaper 

| than I was twenty years ago;” and has a protective tariff done that? 

¥ Mr. Bayne. Oh! 

: Mr. Witson. My friend says ‘‘Oh!” I can cite the gentleman 
here to the very paragraph in the New York Tribune where it says 
coal-oil has come down from 70 cents to 7 cents a gallon. 

Mr. Bayne. How could it be even a hundred per cent. cheaper 
if it sold for anything at all? 

Mr. Witson. Well, I am beginning at the other end. ([Laugh- 
ter. | 

_. Now, I wih to read a specimen of a protectionist’s argument. 

Senator Frye, in his speech, which the Home Market Club is spend- 

ing so much money to circulate, says: 

We have some wonderful advantages in this country of ours in this matter 

of manufacturing over any I saw; I believe over any in the wide world. In 

the first place, we can feed a billion more men on our land than we do to-day, 
and suffer no harm either. 

_ Then again, we have an enormous seacoast and rivers and lakes which the 

Almighty planted just exactly right for us to use for our purposes to make 

cheap freights all over the country. ‘Then again, we have more railroads than 
all the rest of the world combined, and to-day our freights are cheaper in the 

United States of America than in any other country on this earth. On our 

through lines the rates are not one half what they are on the through lines in 
England. That is a great advantage. Again, we raise our own cotton and a 
part of England’s. We can raise all the cotton the world needs if we please. 
Texas alone can produce every pound of cotton you use to-day and England 
purchases from us, and yet not be exhausted at all. Again, we can raise all 
the wool we need in this country without the slightest difficulty, unless the free- 
traders get it on the free-list. [Laughter. ] 

Again, we have iron in twenty-four States and Territories, piled up in 

R mountains now and then, like those in Missouri, with 500,000,000 tons in their 

ie ‘bosoms, accessible, more accessible than the iron of any other country. 

Again, we have inexhaustible coal-fields, accessible too. Again, we have— 
for J have seen it—mountains of salt; I saw one in Louisiana where with a pick 


ay 


a a Ha a rae NEL UR copii AS lh SO ea Gina I PT 


eoeabe tk 


154 WILLIAM L. WILSON. 


you could pick the salt out in blocks. Mountains of sulphur, granite, sand- 
stone, marble, lime-rock, slate, supplies of borax, gold, silver, copper. 

Every conceivable thing that we need to make us a great manufacturing 
nation is spread out here for our use, ninety one-hundredths of it to-day lying 
as untouched as when planted there in the earth by the finger of the Almighty. 
Again—and this meeting here to-night illustrates this—we have the most active, 


earnest, vigorous business men that are to be found on the earth. Why, abroad 


they will go to sleep while a man in America is making a fortune [laughter]; 
open their stores at 10 o’clock, and close them at 4; idle behind the counter, 
seeking no trade. Again, we have the most ambitious, hopeful, reasonable, 
intelligent laboring people that are to be found. Z 


We all know that this is substantially true; that it is scarcely an 
overdrawn picture of the natural and other advantages which the 
American manufacturer enjoys over those of other countries; and 
would you not suppose that when he had reached this point in his 
speech, for very shame he would turn to the millionaires around that 
banquet-table and say, ‘‘ Gentlemen, for generations you who possess 
all these advantages have prevailed on the Government to tax the 
farmer for your benefit and building up. From his scanty earnings 
you have been drawing an unearned dividend to insure your pros- 
perity and pile up your wealth. It is time now, under these favor- 
able conditions over your competitors, so much greater than he 
enjoys, for you to renounce your bounties wrung from his toil, and, 
thanking him for-his long endurance, step down and fight your own 
battles in the industrial ranks beside him.” 

But he does nothing of the kind. Like the stag in the fable that 
was enamored with the beauty of his horns, but at the first sound of 
the hunter’s bugle fled ingloriously away, so Senator Frye, after all 
these dwelling words and this boasting of the advantages possessed. 
by the members of the Home Market Club, at the first suggestion of 
a diminution of their bounties, scuds away on cowardly legs and 
never rests until the ‘‘embattled farmers,” three ranks deep, stand 
between him and English competition. [Laughter on the Demo- 
cratic side. | : 

But, my friends, if this protective tariff is such a good thing for 
the American farmer, why is he to-day the least prosperous of all 
American citizens? Why is it that land is going down in all the 
older States? Why is it that the American farmer, with the best 
facilities at his command, with all his energy, thrift, and sobriety, 
is fighting a hard and ofttimnes a losing battle? 

My friend from Missouri [Mr. Bland] excited some criticism on 
the other side of the House by his statements as to the mortgages on 
the farms in this country. I do not wish to make any alge 


; 


_ that is not sustained by the facts, and so I have obtained the last 


_ report of the labor bureau of the State of Michigan, which covers an 
- Investigation into the mortgages on Michigan farms, and which 
g presents some striking figures. I stand here to-day and say that I 
have not the slightest doubt that the Michigan farmer is as indus- 
_ trious, as hard-working, as intelligent as the farmer in any other 


- section of the country, and yet this official volume shows that 47.4 


_ of the farm lands in Michigan are covered by mortgages, and that 
- the mortgages are 46.8 per cent. of the assessed valuation of the 


farms mortgaged. Compare the condition of the unprotected 
Michigan farmer with the condition of the protected owner of 


copper mines in Michigan, the latter piling up dividend upon divi- 


-dend, million upon million, out of the privilege granted him by 
_ Congress to tax the people of this country, and the other working 
early and delving late and piling up mortgage after mortgage upon ~ 


his estate. [Applause on the Democratic side. ] 


Mr. Witson. The farmers have neither the time nor the money 


4 to come here and besiege Congress about these matters. They are 
-. chained to the plow, to their daily labor. They cannot come here 


_ to look after their own interest; but the owners of the copper mines, 


: and the other industries that are protected and subsidized, are here 
_ attall times in your lobbies urging measures for their own benefit. 
_ [Applause on the Democratic side. ] 


Now, if protection is such a good thing for the American farmer, 


why, I ask again, is the value of American farmlands depreciating? 


‘ Why is it that in the magnificent Shenandoah Valley, situated 
between the beautiful Blue Mountains, and so faithfully represented 
here by my friend before me [Mr. O’Ferrall]—why is it that that 


= valley, with as noble a population as can be found anywhere under ~ 
_ the sun, with natural advantages unsurpassed by any section of the | 


_ country—why is it the people of that valley are fighting a hard and 
- cheerless fight to-day? Why is it, as Mr. David A. Wells tells us in 
the last number of the Popular Science eee that in New 


England 


_ Agricultural lands not remote from large centers of population can often 


_ be bought for a smaller price than fifty years ago would have been regarded as 
_-a fair appraisal, and even less than the cost of the buildings and walls at 


present upon them ? 


T have here, to support me, the exact words of Governor Foraker. 


- Inhis inaugural address, January 1, 1887, he said, referring to the 
period since the last decennial assessment of real estate in 1880; 


ad 


155 


wy Te hore Co ds 2G te ee Way pelts PEN os iis Ore Be NT 
Ba DS SET Cee the aN ty Ee Tae 

gee 

eg 


= 
Ee 


soba 


156 | “WILLIAM oN WILSON. ‘ 


There has been a heavy decline. Farm property is from 25 to 50 per cent, 


cheaper to-day than it then was. | 
That is good authority for our friends on the other side. 


HOME MARKET ARGUMENT. 
‘We have heard on this floor time and again: the ‘‘ old, old story” 
of the ‘‘home market.” I have here the great speech made by Mr. 
Clay in 1832, when he was urging upon the farmers of the country 


what the opponents of this bill would denounce as free trade, but 


what he supposed to be a protective tariff. He says, in substance: 
‘*T rest the whole case on two grounds.” One of these was that the 
protective system would build up a home demand for the products of 
the farm, and thus maintain or advance the price of those products. 

Whatever force may have been in that argument when used by 
Mr. Clay is entirely dissipated to-day. Mr. Clay spoke to a country 
without railroads, without telegraphs. There were no steamships 
traversing the ocean, no cables under the ocean. He spoke to a 
country whose farmers, with the exception of those adjacent to its 


Eastern rivers and seaboard, sought a market for their produce in 


the nearest town, to which they hauled it in their own wagons; 
when the value of a bushel of wheat was exhausted by a haul of 300 
miles, and that of a bushel of corn by a haul of 100 miles. It was a 
day when ‘‘manufacture” meant something very different from 


what it means to-day. As late as eight years afterward Mr. Webster — 


described American manufactures as ‘‘a little capital mixed with 
manual labor.” At that time the neighboring village or town, with 
its woolen mill, its hat factory, its shoemakers, its varied industries, 
was flesh and blood to consume the farmer’s products and wear the 
clothing made from his wool and cotton. 

The world has been created anew since Mr. Clay made that speech. 
To-day we havea railroad system of 150,000 miles, extending into 
every corner of this country where population or product invites it. 
To-day we have instantaneous communication with every section of 
the country, with every portion of the world. You can order a 
cargo of tea from China and it will be loaded on the ship before 
night. An order for wheat from Liverpool to San Francisco will 
outstrip the lagging sun and get there hours before him. You can 
transfer millions of dollars in the twinkling of an eye from the 
money market of Calcutta to that of London or New York. The 
whole world with the construction of railroads, with the building of 
steam-ships, with the laying of cables has been drawn into one 
family. The price of the farmer’s products is no longer decided in 


the market of the neighboring village, but in the great market of — 


& 
rs 
ee 
¥ 
an 

ea 
aKc 
eae 

ort 


° Pe ir on es Tee ie Pate el ee 
sete) foe file, 2S Ws hai 


WILLIAM L. WILSON. 157 


the world. The price of the farmer’s cotton, his wheat, his meat, 
and dairy products is no longer decided even in his own country, 
but by the free, untrammeled competition of the markets of all the 


x _ world. 


_ - During all that time the progress of invention has been displacing 
human labor by machinery. To-day one man in a factory, and fre- 
quently a child, tending some great mechanical invention, produces 
what in Henry Clay’s day would have taken the labor of ten or even 
twenty men. | 

In the first annual report of the Bureau of Labor we have some 
striking illustrations of this displacement of labor by machinery. 
In a manufactory of agricultural implements 600 hands do the work 
that formerly required 2,145. In the manufacture of boots and shoes 
one hand does the work of five, and will produce enough shoes ina 
year to supply a thousand men. In the manufacture of carpets one 
hand with the improvements in machinery does the work that re- 


_ quired from ten to twenty; in spinning, the work of from seventy- 
‘five to one hundred. In the manufacture of some kinds of hats one 
-man isequal tonine. In a large establishment in New Hampshire im- 


proved machinery, even in the past ten years, has dispensed with 50 


per cent. of human labor in the making of cotton goods. By the use 


of improvements and inventions in the past ten or fifteen years, in 
hammers used in the manufacture of steel, there has been a dis- 


_ placement of employés in the proportion of nearly 10 to1. In the 


Pn RRO ee 
Dies Ae 


manufacture of paper, a new machine for drying and cutting, run by 


>: four men and six women, will do the work of one hundred persons. 
- Inthe manufacture of wall-paper the displacement has been 100 to 1. 


Equally striking facts as to the woolen and other industries might 
be given, but I will call special attention to this general statement. 


_ The mechanical industries of the United States carried on by steam 
and water represent the labor of 21,000,000 men. On our railroads 
- to-day 250,000 men do the work which when Mr. Clay spoke would 


have required 13,500,000 men and 54,000,000 horses. | 


To do the work now done by power and power machinery in our mechani- 
caLindustries and upon our railroads would require men representing a popula- 
tion of 172,500,000 in addition to the present population of 55,000,000. 


And it is just in the protected industries of the country, employ- 
ing altogether, according to the estimate of the late Secretary 
Manning, not more than 5 per cent. of the labor of the country, that 
the chief displacement of human labor by machinery has occurred; 
and yet we all know that while Mr. Clay was willing to compromise 


_ 


WILLIAM L. WILSON. ¥ 


ona tariff of 20 per cent. to protect flesh and blood, the demand ~ 
to-day is for 47 per cent. to protect machinery! [Applause. ] 
To-day American manufactures no longer mean as they did to 
Daniel Webster, manual labor mixed with a little capital. They 
mean great capital mixed with a little manual jabor. Moreover, as 
our transportation system has been perfected, we have witnessed the 
gradual disappearance of local manufactures and their massing in — 
immense industrial establishments at particular points. They are 
to-day sufficient and more than sufficient to supply all the demands — 
of our home consumption, and yet the farmer has to look abroad for 
purchasers of his surplus products. 

Two-thirds of our cotton, nearly one-third of our wheat, immense 
quantities of other farm products, must be sold to foreigners for lack 
of home consumers, and yet the argument is daily addressed to the 
farmer, ‘‘Tax yourself still longer to diversify industry and build 
up purchasers for your products.” Our surplus wheat-crop last 
year would feed thirty millions of people. Is there any device of 
taxation by which the farmer could build up a home demand for 
that? You say to the Minnesota farmer, complaining that he gets 
but 60 cents a bushel for his wheat, ‘‘ Continue to uphold the tariff; 
it will start up other industries in your State to buy your wheat.” 
' But the farmer, if he is intelligent, knows that there is a cry of over- 
production from our manufacturers to-day; that we already have 
more than we can find a market for; and as long as there is free 
trade among the States of this country there is no taxation to which 
he can submit that will necessarily bring these industries to Minne- — 
sota aside from the natural advantages that would bring them there 
without such taxation. 

But suppose you give him a rolling-mill capable of supplying all 
- the steel rails needed for the railroads of his State, a sugar-refinery 
capable of supplying all the sugar consumed in his State, and a boot 
and shoe factory sufficient for the demands of the entire population 
of Minnesota, there will not be human labor enough in any one of 
them to consume the wheat-crop of a single large farm. With all 
the families dependent upon them they would add not one mill to 
the price of his wheat, and little, if any, to the price ot his other 


products. “ 


So much for the home-market idea. It is but a snare and a dee 
lusion to the American farmer. His surplus products sent abroad 
determine the prices of those he sells at home. Without such for- 
eign market they would sell still lower at home. But to the gentle- 
- men of the Home Market Club of New England the home-market 
idea is a most solid and profitable reality. It means for them a 


2 ele 


We WLI TE, WILSON. 19 


population of 60,000,000 shut in by a benevolent Government and 
. forced to buy of them at prices which the Government is seeking to 
- stimulate 47 per cent. higher than they would be if subjected to the 
game competition under which the farmer sells his staple products, 


COMPETITION AND TRUSTS. 


But one further remark, and I will relieve the patience of the 
- committee. The other argument used by Mr. Clay was that indus- 
tries, once established by protection, would gradually, by their free 
competition among themselves, give to the farmer their products as 
cheaply as he could buy them elsewhere. Mr. Clay dwelt with much 

_ force and variety of illustration on the ‘‘ beneficent principle of com- 
petition,” which was to bring the consumer his reward for any tem- 
porary sacrifices he was subjected to. He said: 


= 


Of all human powers operating on the affairs of mankind none is greater 
than that of competition. It is action and reaction. It operates between in- 
_ dividuals of the same nation and between different nations. It resembles the 
* meeting of the mountain torrent, grooving by its precipitous motion its own ~ 
-channel, and ocean’s tide. Unopposed, it sweeps everything before it; but 
_ !'eounterpoised, the waters become calm, safe, and regular. 


Statesman as Mr. Clay was, he could not look far enough into the 
future to see that a time might come when the mountain torrent and 
the ocean tide, instead of opposing their great forces so as to produce 
this safe and calm counterpoise, would deliberately unite them to 

- sweep all obstructions from their path. 
He never dreamed that the great industrial establishments, fos- 
_ tered and built up under a protective system on the implied condi- 
tion that they would honestly compete among themselves so as to give 
- the cheapest products to those whose bounties had built them up, 
would combine into the modern trust to despoil and pillage their 
benefactors. He did not see what George Stephenson early saw, 
‘that where combination is possible competition is impossible. All 
this he did not look forward to, but we are seeing it with our 
own eyes and suffering it in our own experience. I know that gen- 
- tlemen on the other side are quite sensitive on this point. I know 
they are ready to exclaim: ‘‘ Why, surely you do not mean to argue 
that these industrial monsters which are springing up on every 
hand, so full of portent to the welfare of the people and the purity 
- of our Government, are born of our tariff.” But that is exactly 
what I do maintain. 
What is a trust? It isa combination, more or less secret and con- 


160 WILLIAM L. WILSON, = 


fidential, as its name implies, to form a monopoly for controlling the _ 
production or the sale of some article of necessary or general con- _ 
sumption. eh 

There may be a natural monopoly where the supply or produc- ; 
tion of an article is confined to local limits, as the anthracite-coal 
fields to Pennsylvania, as the oil fields of this country, in which cases 
the owners may unite to control supply and regulate prices. There 
is also an artificial monopoly where the law steps in and confers 
special privileges on certain parties, whereby they may wholly or 
largely dictate their own terms to consumers; and this is exactly 
what our present tariff does. : 

The Government says to the protected industries, ‘‘I will add 47 
per cent. to the value of all articles made abroad and thus shield 
you against competition from without ;” and the protected industries 
are now saying, ‘‘Let us combine to shield ourselves against all 
competition from within. The Government will permit us to sell 
our products to the people at anything less than the price of like for- 
eign products with 47 per cent. added. Let us see that we come as 
little below that limit as possible.” 

I had intended, but for the diversions from my line of remarks, 
to develop this subject in some detail. I will point to a single speci- 
men, and thata mere infant, a Hercules in the cradle, the great 
sugar trust, as uncovered by the Committee on Manufactures. Six- 
teen of our large sugar-refineries, furnishing the bulk of all the sugar 
consumed in this country, joined in a trust a few months ago, with 
a capital of $50,000,000. Almost simultaneously with their combina 
tion five of these refineries shut down and cease to produce. One is © 
sold for a city park; another, one of the largest, is to be dismantled. 
Almost immediately the margin between the price of raw and re- 
fined sugars begins to widen. At one time it had reached a centa — 
pound! When the testimony was taken before the committee it was — 
five-sixteenths of a cent! We consume three thousand million 
pounds of sugar in this country yearly. One cent a pound above 
ordinary profits would mean $30,000,000; five-sixteenths of a cent 
would mean nearly $10,000,000. 

Similar trusts are springing up constantly in the articles pro- 
tected by your tariff and beneath its favoring shelter. . 

I have quite a list here which a friend has gathered from the col- 
umns of a single great paper, the New York Times, but I have no 
time to read them to-day. 

Need I dwell upon the effects of such combinations ? To the pro- 
ducers of their raw material they dictate prices, for there is but one 4 


lt pa Cah Be ie 
wot, n Tee ee is 
Pht af et. tata mes a * 


WILLIAM L. WILSON. me ee RL. 


F purchaser. To the consumers of what they sell they dictate prices, 
for there is but one seller. 2 
4 They limit and lessen the demand for labor, for they lessen the sup- 
ply of their products in order to force up the price in the markets. 
_ With the North River refinery in New York turned into a park, and 
the Oxnard refinery in Brooklyn dismantled, labor is thrown perma- 
nently out of employment. It was the misery of banishment from 
Rome that Rome was the whole world. It is the misery of labor 
turned out of any one of these refineries that one is all and all is one. 
If the labor organizations of the country have found it hard to con- 
_ tend with the great corporations standing alone, what will their 
_ prospects be when these corporations melt into one? Can we shut 
our eyes to the influence of such organizations on public morals ? 
Will our legislatures, our judiciary, our ballot-box escape defilement 
when corporate power and corporate wealth thus grasped by a sin- 
gle and often a hidden hand come to demand special privileges 
under the law ? 
I acknowledge the courtesy of the House in extending my time . 
and listening so patiently to my somewhat disconnected remarks. 
_ This is a momentous question. None could be more so unless it 
‘involved the existence of the nation. It does not take many weeks’ 
service foreven the humblest member of the Committee on Ways 
and Means like myself to get new and sobering ideas as to the 
greatness of this conflict. When the eyes of the prophet’s servant 
‘were unsealed he saw camped around the prophet mighty hosts and 
_ chariots of fire, invisible to other eyes. So when the servant of the 
people comes to deal with the tariff question he sees, with a clear- 
ness of vision not granted to others, those-mighty hosts, the powers 
of wealth and combination, of monopoly in all its odious and defiant 
_ forms, great corporations and monster trusts, all formed in linked 
_ phalanx around the protective system. [Applause on the Demo- 
_ eratic side.] If he is awed by the greatness of the struggle, he is 
. also nerved by the greatness of the stake. This fight will go on. 
There will be no industrial peace in this country until our tax 
laws are fixed upon a basis that is just to all. [Applause.] We 
will keep the country rocking from ocean, to ocean until we have 
secured just and equal rights before the law for all its citizens. 
You may strike down that tribune of the people at the other 
end of the avenue, who, putting behind him all counsels of pru- 
dence, spoke out that ringing summons that rallied the people as 
- nothing else ever did. You may strike down the leaders in this 
fight as you struck them down in the last Congress and the previous 
_ CQongress, Those who hold the standard may fall, but other hands 


Je ea! \ 


BO ee SO nee Es Sire, Soot SSS SERN LS eee een Re cee ee a ee on 
Seed tee eI A ONS eee PIS aE E Uae MERE ER yet Ly OM MTI eh ROSAS Wo RAISERS SS ENACT S ERD See ea, | a oe oe 
te eee 5 ft Wa an Tae SRC, tres Yel SS eee aye ee 
x <6 me ake Ye ee ~€ 


162 SEL Aae L, WIESON. | 


will take it up and move forward. The spirit of our intelligence is — 
behind us. The spirit of liberty is behind us, All wecan hope for — 
the future greatness of this country hangs upon the issue; and in 
the sentiment and somewhat in the words of Mr. Speaker, whoever 
may falter and whoever may fail, the people of the country mean ~ 
that its glorious destinies shall be preserved; that they shall be 
transmitted unimpaired to posterity; that the country shall not 
belong to monopolists on the one hand or to communists on the © 
other, but shall be as it was designed to be, a Government of the 
people, by the people, and for the people. - [Great applause, and cries — 
of ‘‘ Vote! Vote!) ee. 


HON. JULIUS CG. BURROWS. 


ats 


4 OF MICHIGAN. 

ee : (Republican Side.) 7 "Lee 
’ It costs something to maintain a Government for 60,000,000 of 
! people. The Secretary of the Treasury estimates that it will re- 
quire $326,530,000 to meet the probable obligations of the Govern- 
ment during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1888, and ending June 
80, 1889. These liabilities must be discharged. The anticipated 
income of the Government. for the same period from sources other 
_ than taxation is as follows: 

et 

Mey 95102. Gf PUDLC TANCE. a cise cg osc bose sus vu neosse acto ve $10,000,000.00 
Be re ional, bares oo oe eae ae nace ese wesc nee 2,000,000.00 
- From interest and sinking fund, Pacific railways.............. 2,000,000.00 
a From customs POCS-UNCS. DENAITIES, CLC. os ihc cas u's See swine be 1,150,000.00 
_ From fees consular, letters patent; and lands...............065 3,500,000.00 
: _ From sales of public property. ... 2.2.00... . sss eee ec eee ae eees 300,000.00 
= Brom profits on coinage, assays, etc... .... 1. 1s eee e tee ees e ees 9,000,000.00 
From deposits for surveying public lands......:.............. 150,000.00 
Ss From revenues of the District of Columbia.................4. 2,400,000. 00 


ie 2 From miscellaneous SOUrCES....... cee eee eee Bs ie eadeerores 4,500,000.00 


Deducting this amount from the estimated needs of the Govern- 
ment and there will remain $291,530,000 to be provided for.. There 
are but two ways of raising this sum—one by a loan, the other by 

taxation. A proposition to borrow in times of peace and reasonable 
‘prosperity. would excite universal derision. Taxation therefore is 
the only legitimate recourse. But this is already provided for by 
law. The Secretary of the Treasury estimates that at the present 


States during the next fiscal year from— 
oes 163 


= Aggregating the sum of only........... See ge ee ABE 35,000,000.00 — 


¥ rate of taxation there will flow into the Treasury of the United 


gent 2 ee a2: 


164 JULIUS 0. BURROWS. 


Tnternal revenue Bources,.3) Sl) oe POL ae Sos ee $120,000,000 
Cfistoms. S254 2i-. SOE ES ae WC sesso DE 228,000,000 
Ageregating the sum Of........ssseeeeeees By Rg oe - 848,000,000 


an amount in excess of the estimated needs of the Government of 
$56,470,000. Fifty-six millions and a half in round numbers, there- 
fore, measures the surplus which will be accumulated in the 


Treasury during the next fiscal year if the present rate of taxation 


_ be continued and the appropriations for governmental expenses shall 
equal the estimates of the Secretary. It is probable, however, 
. that the full sum of $326,530,000 will not be appropriated. If the 
estimates of the Secretary for the next fiscal year are cut to the 
basis of expenditures for the current year, namely, three hundred 

and nine millions and a half, the surplus in the Treasury will be in- 
creased to seventy-three millions and a half. 

Seventy-five millions, therefore, is the fullest measure of the 
surplus which will be accumulated in the Treasury during the next 
fiscal year at the present rate of taxation and expenditures. It 
must be borne in mind, howexer, that this estimate is based upon 
the assumption that the Democratic party is to take no thought of 
the Republic beyond its absolute needs. There is to be no provision 
for growth, for advancement, for the uplifting of the nation. Our 
10,000 miles of seacoast exposed to foreign assault are to remain 
defenseless. Our Navy and merchant marine is to languish and 
decay. Fruitful fields, inviting commercial venture and giving © 
promise of enlarged trade, are not to be occupied. Our vast system 
of internal improvements is to be neglected. The dark shadow of 
ignorance resting upon the people like a pall, precluding the pos- 


sibility of good citizenship, is not to be lifted. The full measure of ie 


our just obligations to the defenders and preservers of the Republic 
is not to be discharged. In a word, this calculation is upon the 
hypothesis that the Democratic party is to use no more money than 
is necessary to keep the soul and body of the national life together. 
Assuming such to be the settled policy of the Democratic party, — 
there will be in the Treasury at the end of the next fiscal year 
seventy-five millions beyond the requirements for such a purpose. — 
That the accumulation of such a surplus must be averted there 


can be no question. A constantly accruing and ever increasing 


surplus not only invites to profligacy, but insures swift financial 
disaster. There can be, therefore, no conflict of opinion but that 
there must be such a modification of our tax laws as will insurea — “ 
reduction of revenue to the basis of probable governmental expendi- __ 


ture. This would seem to bea problem easily solved, and indeed its - 


v A ’ ery © rts gt ton (3 aa UP. 
Ue dark, Foun a a ee a fp { 


4 - 


aa _ JULIUS 0. BURROWS. ee oe tO 
solution would be attended with little difficulty if no other result 
_ was to be attained than a reduction of the surplus. In such case it 
would only be necessary to ascertain the sources of revenue and 
_ then cut off indiscriminately sufficient to insure the desired result. 
But a reduction of the revenue is not the only nor indeed the chief 
_ end to be attained. The method by which that reduction is to be 
accomplished has become the main point of controversy, and, in- 
deed, the only point about which there is any serious conflict of 
opinion. Shall the proposed reduction be taken from internal or 
from customs revenues, or from both; and if from both, in what 
_ proportion from each? These are the questions of chief concern, and © 
_ here parties divide and here the conflict begins. 
What is the occasion for this division—why this conflict? It is 
- this: We derive our revenues from two sources, internal taxation 
and a tax on imports. Our tariff on imports is to-day confessedly 
_ protective in that it is levied not with a view to raising ‘‘revenue 
only,” but to protect American labor and encourage American in- 
_ dustries. The Democratic party, or at least one wing of it, under 
_ the leadership of President Cleveland, assails this system, denounc- 
ing it as ‘‘ vicious and illogical,” and declares it to be not only un- 
_wise but unconstitutional; that duties on imports should be levied, 
in the language of the last national Democratic platform, for ‘* rev- 
enue only,” submitting of course to such accidental protection as 
- may be incident thereto as an evil to be endured rather than an end 
_ to be attained. On the contrary, the Republican party believes in a 
- protective tariff; that in imposing duties upon imports, revenue is 
not the only consideration, but that these duties should be so ad- 
_ justed as to give encouragement to American enterprise, investment 
_ to American capital, and employment to American labor; and the 
_ Republican party insists that our present protective system shall — 
not be disturbed except so far as it may be necessary to correct its 
- incongruities and harmonize its provisions. 
A With these two conflicting theories it is easy to understand why 
the contest arises, at the very threshold, upon the method of reduc- 
_ tion. If we reduce our revenues by removing or materially lessen- 
ing internal taxes, our protective system cannot be seriously dis- 
turbed; on the contrary, if we follow the lead of the President and > 
secure a reduction by such a revision of the tariff as he proposes, 
_ leaving untouched our internal revenues, not only will our protec-. 
_ tive system be destroyed, but the nation itself will be well out on the 
_ highway to free trade. Therefore it is that the free-trader would 
_ take as little as possible from internal taxation that he may more. 
_ successfully assail our protective policy; while the protectionist would 


a i ace i ceteris IE ot ak 
2 , “re Le Eo vi re Ts ag: 


4 
ie 
> 

4 


| 


ee. 


25; eee ‘JULIUS 0. BURROWS. 


take as much as possible from internal revenues that he may more ~ 
surely defend it. At the foundation, therefore, of this controversy — 
lies the question of policy which must be first settled before we can — 
come to an intelligent consideration of the committee’s bill; and as — 
we are free-traders or protectionists that bill will be approved or 


: cond emned. ssn 


‘I propose, therefore, at this time to submit some general observa- f 
tions touching our revenue system, leaving the discussion of the — 
details of the proposed measure to an uccasion’ when their considera- — 
tion will be immediately in hand. I may pause a moment, however, — 
in passing, to say of this measure as a whole that in its inception — 
and presentation to this House it stands without a parallel in the — 
history of American legislation. Conceived in darkness, brought 
forth in secrecy—its parentage carefully concealed—it was at last 
laid at the door of the Committee on Ways and Means [applause], — 
where the majority took it up as tenderly as though it were their — 
legitimate offspring and hurriedly brought the ‘‘lump of deformity” 
into this House, to be adopted by the ‘Democratic party and nursed 
by the harlot of free trade. [Laughter ‘and applause.| But what- 
ever its parentage, whether British free-trader or the Cobden Club— 
either of whom are capable of the outrage—justice compels me to 
state that public suspicion does not attach to any member of the © 
majority [laughter]; and in further vindication of their high char- ~ 
acter it will be no violation of the secrets of the committee-room to — 
state that, when pressed upon this point, there was no member of — 
the majority so lost to all sense of personal pride as to admit the 
parentage. [Applause.] is 

But seriously. Think of the majority of a great committee of — 
this House, charged with the duty of considering ar important ; 
message of the President of the United States, hiding away from the — 
minority of that committee for six weeks and in some secret place, — 
taking counsel possibly of the enemies of our industries without con- — 
sultation with the minority, framing a measure involving the indus- 
trial prosperity of 60,000,000 of people; and when completed and — 
presented to the full committee, that same majority refusing to enter ; 
upon consideration of its provisions or to disclose any data upon 3 
which their action was based; stolidly refusing to answer any and — 
every question propounded by. the minority touching any portion of 
the bill; submitting to no modification in a single particular, laa 
suggested by the majority ; declining to listen to any member of this 
House in behalf of the people he represents; refusing audience to. 
Senators, the industries of whose States were to be crippled or 
destroyed; rejecting all oes from manufacturers whose connec: P 


1 he ee al Sc oa CE tice str ee. hat ben 6 ee e e Te Stes heehee ay Oe 


‘JULIUS ¢. BURROWS. 167 


tion with their industries enabled them to point out the pernicious 
effects of the proposed measure; refusing to hear one word of protest 
_ from the farmer whose flocks and fields are to be despoiled; shutting 
the door of the committee-room in the face of the laboring men of 
q _ the country who came to plead for the protection of their homes and 
their families; imagine, I say, such conduct on the part of a com- 
mittee of this House and you have a faint conception of the Com- ° 
mittee on Ways and Means of the Fiftieth Congress. [Applause.] 
But to resume the course of my argument. We have to-day a 
-|~~ double system of taxation, direct and indirect. Heretofore it has 
never been the settled policy of the Government to permanently 
maintain both. A choice of methods was open to the founders of 
_ the Republic, and they wisely determined to raise the needed 
-_ revenue for the support of the Government by imposing a duty on 
? imports. That method has never been suspended. It has under- 
gone modifications, at different times, to conform to party demands, 
but it has never for an hour been wholly abandoned. It is the ap- 
_. proved and established method of providing for the ordinary ex- 
penses of the Government. True, direct taxation has sometimes 
_ been resorted to to meet unforeseen national emergencies, but here- 
_ itofore it has always-been abandoned so soon as the exigency had 
- passed. Previous to the war of the rebellion direct taxation was in- 
__voked only in two instances—first in 1791, to meet the extraordinary 
- demands of a new Government with an empty Treasury and an un- 
established credit, and again in 1813, to provide the sinews of war in 
the second conflict with Great Britain. In both instances, however, 
direct taxation was abandoned at the earliest moment consistent 
_ with nation honor and safety. The law of 1791 remained in force 
but nine years, and was repealed at the earnest solicitation of Presi- 
| dent Jefferson, while the act of 1813, after having been on the 
- statute-books but four years, was expunged upon the recommenda- 
tion of President Monroe. 

During the whole period of our national history from 1789 to 
1862, nearly three-quarters of a century, not more than $22,000,000 
of our revenues were derived from direct taxation. In 1862, for the 
third time, we supplemented our customs law by internal taxes, to 
meet the extraordinary demands of the civil war, and have con- 
tinued these exactions until the National Treasury is overflowing 

_ with a needless surplus. Now for the first time it is proposed to in- 
graft the system of direct taxation onto the body of our revenue 
laws, to be permanently maintained, with its army of four thousand 
officials, at an annual cost to the people of more than $4,000,000. 
But I have alluded to this only for the purpose of showing that here- 


iy 


— 


t +¢ 
oe ee ee ae 
te ae ” ‘ . 
a ee ~S 
: > Si pee is ae 
ah :} Pale 2 egy Se a ie 


168 JULIUS C. BURROWS. 


tofore it has been the settled policy of the Government, under all 


parties and at all times, to rely entirely upon revenues derived from 
a tariff on imports, to meet the ordinary expenses of the Government; 
and that direct taxation has never been resorted to except to meet 
some unforeseen national emergency, and heretofore promptly aban- 
doned when the emergency had passed. Whatever conflict of opin- 
ion, therefore, may now exist touching the abolition or modification 
of our internal-revenue system of taxation, there can be no question 
that to supply the needed revenues for the ordinary expenses of the 
Government by duty on imports has been from the beginning the 


established policy of the Government. ma 


Yet, in the face of the uniform practice of all parties from ins 
foundation of the Government, the gentleman from Texas criticises 
the course of the Republican party in this regard. Chagrined at the 
disclosure made by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. McKinley] in the 
views of the minority that the Democratic party since 1866, though 
in control of the House of Representatives eleven years of the time, 
has reduced taxation only a little over $6,000,000, while in the eleven 
years of Republican control we reduced taxation more than $362,- 
000,000, he seeks to escape the arraignment by criticising the charac- 
ter of our reduction. Seventy-eight million dollars of it came from 

“putting tea and coffee on the free-list, and other modifications of the 
tariff; $284,000,000 by removing internal taxes. But these were war 
taxes, imposed for war purposes, and to have retained them would 
have been an exaction as unnecessary as it would have been de- 
spotic. More than this, to have continued these exactions would have 
surely overthrown and destroyed our protective system. Let me say 
to the gentleman that the Republican party is not prepared to sub- 
stitute direct taxation, with all its inquisitorial methods, for that 
beneficial policy which, while yielding sufficient revenue, fosters 
American industries and protects American labor. [Applause.] But 
I must remind the gentleman that in the reduction of $6,000,000 by 
his party they lost sight of the poor man’s blanket and the neces- 
saries of life and relieved that portion of our fellow-citizens who 
were staggering under the load of taxed snuff, tobacco, and whisky. 

Assuming that the American people will not abandon a policy 
adopted by the fathers and approved by a century of experience, I 
come to the consideration of the vital point at issue, namely, upon 
what articles shall duties be imposed, and to what extent shall they 
be levied—with regard to revenue only or for the double purpose of 
revenue and protection? Shall the theories of the free-trader pre- 
vail and dominate in the revision of our tariff, or shall it continue to 


be adjusted not only with a view to revenue but for the promotion 


s Oe tere, then, in the beginning we have the bold avowal of the 
fathers that duties are to be levied not only for revenue but to en- 
courage and protect. American manufactures, which declaration re- 
ceived the support of such illustrious men as Madison, Lee, King, 
_ Ellsworth, Ames, Trumbull, and Roger Sherman, and the approval 


~ es et Ne Bs ~ 


JULIUS C. BURROWS. ; 169 


of American interests? This is the question at issue. In this con- 
test the Republican party takes the side of protection and will resist 
to the uttermost any attempt coming from whatever source it may 


to cripple American industries, destroy American capital, or pau- 
perize American labor. In adhering to this policy of protection the 


Republican party can invoke the teachings of the fathers whose 
patriotism and sagacity laid the foundations of the Republic. The 


first Congress that assembled wnder our national Constitution was 


confronted with an enormous debt, an uncertain credit, and an 
empty Treasury. Its first duty was to provide sufficient revenue to 


~méet the national demands. 


They conceived that in the exercise of the power of taxation and 
that no less important power to regulate commerce with foreign 
nations, there were other and higher considerations than the 
mere requirement of revenue. Smarting under the recollection of 
the industrial thralldom imposed upon them by the British Govern- 
ment, reflecting upon the impotency of the Confederation to guard 
and promote the general welfare, they naturally embraced the 
earliest opportunity under the National Government to devise a plan 


~ not only for raising revenue, but for laying the foundations of that 


industrial independence which in its results has made the Republic 


the marvel of the world. So it was that having determined to secure 


the needed revenues by a duty on imports they proceeded to declare 


that in the imposition of such duties regard should be had not only 
to revenue but to the development of American industries in the fol- 


lowing express terms: 


Whereas it is necessary for the support of Government, for the discharge of 
the debts of the United States, and for the encouragement and protection of 
manufacture that duties be laid on goods, wares, and merchandise imported: — 
Therefore, 

Be it enacted, etc. 


of that most illustrious of Presidents and. patriots, George Washing- — 
_fon. | ‘Tn the course of debate upon this first tariff measure se: 
Amés said: 


i es 


I conceive that the present Constitution was dedicated by commercial in- 
terest more than any othereanse ‘The want of an efficient government to secure 


ee: one 


a 


PERSE RE ASCE CPN EMR TE SS MOR SR Re es eas i ae aa SO a es Lys oO pe ane 
ON ae ie ii ra Rae Rh ee bee Bere 


170 JULIUS C BURROWS. 


the manufacturing interests and to advance our commerce was Jong seen by 


~ men of judgment and pointed out by patriots solicitous to promote our general 


welfare. 
George Washington, in his annual message to Congress, said: 


Congress have repeatedly and not without success directed their attention to 
the encouragement of manufactures. The object is of too much consequence 
not to insure a continuance of their efforts in every way which shall appear 
eligible. 


John Adams, in a special message to Congress, said: 


The manufacture of arms within the United States still invites the attention 
of the National Legislature. At a considerable expense to the public this 
manufactory has been brought to such a state of maturity as with continued 
encouragement will supersede the necessity of future importations from foreign 
countries. 


Thomas Jefferson, in his second annual message, said: 


To cultivate peace and maintain commerce and navigation in all their law- 
ful enterprises, to foster our fisheries as nurseries to navigation for the nurture 


of man, and to protect the manufactures adapted to our circumstances, these 


are the landmarks by which we are to guide ourselves. 
Ina letter to Benjamin Austin, in 1816, he further said: 


We have experienced what we did not then believe that there existed, both 
profligacy and power enough to exclude us from the field of exchanges with 
other nations. That to be independent for the comforts of life we must fabri- 
cate them ourselves. We must now place our manufacturers by the side of the 


agriculturist. The former question is now suppressed, or rather assumes anew 
form. The grand inquiry now is, shall we make our own comforts or go with- 
out them at the will of a foreign nation? He therefore who is now against —__ 
domestic manufactures must be for reducing us either to dependence upon that ; 
nation or to be clothed in skins and live like beasts in dens and caverns, I am 


proud to say that I am not one of these. Experience has taught me that manu- 
factures are now as necessary to our independence as to our comfort... 


- 


James Madison, in 1809, in aspecial message to’ Congress, declared ; : 


The revision of our commercial laws appropriate to adapt them to the 
arrangement which has taken place with Great Britain will doubtless engage 
the early attention of Congress. It will be worthy at the same time of their 
just and provident care to make such further alterations in the laws as will 
more especially protect and foster the several branches of manufacture which 


have been recently instituted or extended by the inudaiils exertions oF our. 


citizens. 


scott seo ig A aA iain Ali I Nia le act 


James Monroe, in his “iva heey address in 1817, declared: 


Our manufactures will likewise require the systematic and fostering care of 
the Government. Possessing as we do all the raw materials, the fruit of our 
own soil and industry, we ought not to depend in the degree we have done on 
supplies from other countries. While we are thus dependent the sudden event 
of war unsought and unexpected cannot fail to plunge us into the most serious 
difficulties. It is important, too, that the capital which nourishes our manutac- — 
tures should be domestic, as its influence, in that case, instead of exhausting, as 


_ it must do in foreign hands, would be felt advantageously on agriculture and 


on every branch of industry. Equally important is it to provide at home a 
market for our raw materials, as by extending the competition it will enhance 
the price and protect the cultivator against the casualties incident to foreign 
markets, 


John Quincy Adams, in his fourth annual message to Congress, 
speaking of the agricultural, commercial, and manufacturing ee 
ests of the nation, said: 


All these interests are alike under the protecting power of legislative au- 
thority. 


Again, on another occasion, he said: 

Is the self-protecting energy of this nation so helpless that there exists in 
the political institutions of our country no power to counteract this foreign. 
legislation that growers of grain must submit to this exclusion from the for- 
eign markets of their products, that the shippers must dismantle their ships, 
the trade of the North stagnate at the wharves, and the manufacturers starve 
at their looms, while the whole people shall pay tribute to foreign industry, to 


be clad in foreign garb; that the Congress of the Union are impotent to re- 
store the balance in favor of native Paduaey destroyed by the statutes of — 


another realm ? 
Andrew Jackson, in his annual message t6 Congress, said: 


The power to impose duties on imports originally belonged to the several 


‘States. The right to adjust these duties with a view to the encouragement of 


domestic branches of industry is so completely identical with that power that 
it is difficult to suppose the existence of the one without the other. The States 


have delegated their whole authority over imports to the Federal Government. 


This authority having thus entirely passed from the States, the right to exer- 


cise it for the purpose of protection does not exist in them, and consequently 


if it be not possessed by the General Government it must be extinct. Our — 
political system would thus present the anomaly of a people stripped of the _ 


right to foster their own industry and to counteract the most selfish and de- — . 


structive policy which might be adopted by foreign. nations, This surely can- 
not be the case, 


Pa MY a peed TAIN LS Ag 0 Sid one! Ais 2 ee a BAY BOT ME FER Lay PORN: te SES Sy A OE et aN en 


JULIUS ¢ 0. BURROWS. — 


In a letter written in 1824 he further said: 


Heaven smiled upon us and gave us liberty and independence. ‘The same 
Providence has blessed us with the means of national independence and is j 
national defense. He has filled our mountains and plains with minerals, with 
lead, iron, and copper, and given us a climate and soil for the growing of hemp ~ 
and wool. These being the great materials of our national defense, they ought 
to have extended to them adequate and fair protection, that our manufacturers 
and laborers may be placed in a fair competition with those of Europe. a 


On another occasion he acknowledged the receipt of a home-made 
hat in the following terms: 


A few days since I had the pleasure to receive the grass hat which you had D 
been pleased to present and forward to Mrs. Jackson as a token of the respect 
and esteem entertained for my public services. Permit me, sir, to return to 
you my grateful acknowledgment for the honor conferred upon us in this 
token. Mrs. Jackson will wear with pride a hat made by American hands 
and made of American materials. Its workmanship, reflecting the highest 
credit upon the authors, will be regarded as an evidence of the perfection 
which our domestic manufacturers may hereafter acquire if properly fostered 
and protected. Upon the success of our manufactures, as the handmaid of 
agriculture and commerce, depends in a great measure the independence of 
our country, and I assure you that none can feel more sensibly than I do the © 
necessity of encouraging them. 


These citations, from the pen and lips of illustrious statesmen in 
approval of a protective policy, might be multiplied indefinitely, but 
with the words of General Garfield I close the recital. In his letter 
accepting the Republican nomination for the Presidency in 1880 he 
said: 


In reference to our custom laws a policy should be pursued which will | 
bring revenues to the Treasury and will enable the labor and capital employed — 
in our great industries to compete fairly in our own markets with the labor 
and capital of foreign producers. We legislate for the people of the United 
States and not for the whole world, and it is our glory that the American 
laborer is more intelligent and better paid than his foreign competitor. Our 
country cannot be independent unless its people, with their abundant natural 
resources, possess the requisite skill at any time to clothe, arm, and equip 
themselves for war, and in time of peace to produce all the necessary imple- 
ments of labor. It was the manifest intention of the founders of the Govern- 
ment to provide. for the common defense, not by standing arms alone, but by 
raising among the people a greater army of artisans, whose intelligence and 
skill should powerfully contribute to the safety and glory of the nation. 


‘But this policy of protection has been approved not only by the 
foremost patriots and statesmen of the Republic, but its wisdom hag 


i f : 1 De ep ae 


Fa lees eee PRESS er GME ot SN LRT EG ie ES BRE Ae IPMS PRE eREY oe ade WS ay ga 
‘JULIUS O. “BURROWS. | 173 


been confirmed by a century of national experience. We have tried 


affirm without fear of contradiction, and I appeal to the history 
of the country in confirmation of the assertion, that the periods of 
- protection in this country have been periods of prosperity and that 
the eras of free trade or a revenue tariff have been eras of depres- 
sion and disaster. . 
We began our national career substantially without manufactur- 
ing. During our colonial history it was the policy of the British 
Government to prevent the establishment of manufacturing indus- 
tries on this side of the Atlantic. Then as now her insatiate greed 
knew no restraint but the limit of her power. The policy of the 
English Government at that time was graphically outlined in an 
article on ‘‘ Trade,” published in London in 1750, as follows: 


Hs 


; 
; 
g 


De eee yearn 


Manufactures in our American colonies should be discouraged and pro- 
hibited. We ought always to keep a watchful eye over our colonies to restrain 
them from setting up any of the manufactures which are carried on in Great 

_. Britain, and any such attempts should be crushed in the beginning. As they 
} will have the providing rough materials to themselves, so shall we have the 
_ mantfacuring of them. If any encouragement be given for raising hemp, 
x | flax, etc., doubtless they will soon begin manufacturing if not prevented ; 
therefore, to stop the progress of any such manufacture it is proposed that 
no weaver have the liberty to set up any looms without first registering at an 
office kept for that’ purpose ; that all slitting mills and engines for drawing 
9 wire or weaving stockings be put down; that all negroes be prohibited from 
weaving either linen or woolen or spinning or combing wool or working in 
any manufacture of iron further than making it into pig or bar iron; that they 
__-also be prohibited from manufacturing hats, stockings, or leather of any kind. 
This limitation will not abridge the planters of any liberty they now enjoy ; 
on the contrary, they will then turn their attention to farming and raising 
those rough materials. If we examine into the circumstances of the in- 
habitants of our plantations and our own it will appear that not one-fourth 
of their product redounds to their own profit, for out of all that comes here 
they only carry back clothing and other accommodations for their families, all 
of which is of the merchandise and manufacture of this kingdom. All these 
advantages we receive by the plantations, besides the mortgages on the 
planters’ estates and the high interest they pay us, which is very considerable. 


Pa a ee ee ae 


ioe 


It was in this spirit that a manufacturing establishment in South 
Carolina was by act of Parliament declared a public nuisance and 
abated; and an English statesman but echoed the dominating voice of 
British counsels when he declared that the colonies should not be — 
permitted to manufacture a hobnail within their borders. 

_ But the tariff act of July 4, 1789, to which I have alluded, broke 


both systems, a protective tariff and a tariff for revenue only, andI ~— 


See ed eee 
res = M -" 


174 : 


the fetters of commercial thralldom and nore to the neste indus 
trial independence. ‘While the early tariff acts were designed to-8 
give encouragement to domestic manufacturing, yet not until 1824 
was-a measure enacted sufficiently protective to guarantee capital — 
and labor from ruinous foreign competition. Previous to that date — 
our manufacturing industries were of feeble and uncertain growth. 
True, they received additional stimulus by the embargo of the war 
of 1812; but no sooner was peace declared than they went down be- ~ 
fore a flood of foreign importations that swept them into ruin. 
England, though forced to acknowledge our independence, was 
determined not to lose her American market, and there was no 
diplomacy, however questionable, no sacrifice, however onerous, ~ 
that she did not invoke to retain it. Foreign goods were put upon 
our market at a loss to the manufacturer, with the deliberate pur- 
pose of destroying our industries. Mr. Brougham, in the House of 
Commons in 1816, made public avowal of such a purpose, declaring: 


It was well worth while to incur a loss upon the first exportation in order 
by the glut to stifle in the cradle those infant manufactures in the United 
States which the war had forced into existence contrary to the natural order — 
of things. —_ a 


Horace Greeley, giving his personal recollection of this period, 
said: 


My distinct personal recollections of this head go back to the period of in- 
dustrial derangement, business collapse, and widespread pecuniary ruin which 
closely followed the close in 1815 of our last war with Great Britain. Peace 
found this country dotted with furnaces and factories, which had suddenly 

Z sprung up under the precarious shelter of embargo and war. These found 
themselves suddenly exposed to a determined and relentless competition. 

Great Britain had pushed her fabrics into almost every corner of the world. 

Of some of these great stocks had nevertheless accumulated, out of fashion 

and only salable far below cost. These were thrown on our market in a per- —— 

fect deluge. Our manufactures went down like grain before the mower. 

Our agriculture and the wages of labor speedily followed. In NewEnglandI 

judge that fully one-quarter of the property went through the sheriff’s mill, 
7 and the prostration was scarcely less general elsewhere.. In New York the 
principal merchants united (1817) in a memorial to Congress to save our com- 

merce as well as our manufactures from utter ruin by increasing the tariffand 
prohibiting the sale at auction of imported fabrics. " : 


Henry Clay, speaking in the United States Senate of our indus- : 
trial condition immediately preceding the tariff of 1824, declared: 


If I were to select any term of seven years since the adoption of the present 
Constitution which exhibited a scene of the most widespread dismay and deso- __ 


c 5 -, ae oe, Se 
fener ae lie 2 ap ewe Sy) Sen 
Se al ars eames a a Ea AS samp ah eh 


putts a BURROWS. : 176 


lation, it mouth be aunts that term of seven years which immediately pre- 
- ceded the establishment of the tariff of 1824. 


But this era a protection was followed by the tariff of 1824 and 
1828, which enthused new life into our languishing industries and 
_ brought to the country a period of marvelous prosperity. The lead- 
3 ing metropolitan journal epitomizes the history of this period as fol- 
Rows: 


ay 


So soon as the tariff of 18 were into operation the whole aspect and 
ae. course of affairs were changed. Activity took the place of sluggishness. 
Capital was invested; labor came into demand; wages advanced; mines were 
___ opened; furnaces built; mills started; shops multiplied; business revived in all 
__ its departments. Revenue flowed copiously into the coffers of the Govern- 
' ment. The debts created by two expensive wars were entirely paid off. 
___ Such a scene of general prosperity had never before been seen by our people, 


President Jackson said in his annual message December 4, 1832: 


Our country presents on every side marks of prosperity and happiness un- 
equaled in any other portion of the world. 


Mr. Clay, in speaking of this era of protection, said: 


= If the term of seven years were to be selected of the greatest prosperity 
which this people have enjoyed since the establishment of their present Consti- 
tution it would-be exactly that period of seven years which immediately fol- 
a lowed the passage of the tariff of 1824. 


2 But unfortunately this era of protection and prosperity was ‘fol: 
‘lowed bythe compromise tariff of 1833, which provided for a grad- 
ual reduction of duties until they should reach an average of not to 
exceed 20 per cent. And what was the effect of this change of 
- policy? Long before that limit had been reached the evidences of 
its pernicious influence were everywhere visible. Capital invested 
in industrial enterprises, to save itself from absolute destruction, 
E was withdrawn. Contemplated expansion of business was aban- 
a _ doned, our manufacturers one after another went down under a tor- 
. 

4 


rent of foreign importations, while American labor stood idle and 
empty-handed in presence of the appalling and widespread desola- 
tion which culminated in the frightful panic of 1837. And not only ~ 
the people but the Government itself became so impoverished that. 

the President of the United States was forced into a broker’s shop to 
raise his overdue and unpaid salary. In 1842 the protective system 
was again invoked, and under its salutary influence our drooping 
industries revived and prosperity took the place of disaster, The 


= 


ns lee Se cages Soest ree yey ee Cea piel Me UE RT kage Se 2 


176 | SULTS. 6.  epaeowe. . 


‘general effect upon the country of the tariff of 1 1842 is best described 
by President Polk in his annual message in 1846: 


Labor in all its branches is receiving an ample reward, while education, 
science, and the arts are rapidly enlarging the means of social happiness. The 
progress of our country in her career of greatness, not only in the vast exten- 
sion of our territorial limits or in the rapid increase of our population, but in 
resources and wealth and in the happy oe of our people, is without an 
example in the history of nations. 3 


. 


But this brief period of prosperity was quickly followed by the 
revenue tariff of 1846 and 1857, which brought to the country an- 
other era of industrial depression, culminating in the panic of 1857, 
the disastrous consequences of which are still within the memory of 
living men. Universal bankruptcy overtook the people, and the 
Government with an empty Treasury was forced in times of peace 
to borrow money at a discount of from 12 to 30 percent. Then 
came the era of protection in 1861, which has now been extended 
over a period of more than.a quarter of a century, and who does not 
know that during these eventful years our industrial advancement 
has been steady and without a parallel in the history of the Re- 
public ? 

In spite of the constant and frightful drain upon our resources, 
incident to and consequent upon a protracted war, we have never- 
theless rapidly grown in national strength, until we stand to-day a 
marvel of industrial development. In 1860 we were without credit 
at home or abroad; to-day our securities are sought for invest- 
ments and command a premium everywhere. Then, with an empty 
national Treasury, we were borrowing money at an exorbitant rate 
of interest to meet the ordinary expenses of the Government; to- 
day, with every matured obligation discharged and a Treasury ever- 
flowing, we authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to anticipate 
our obligations. Our manufacturing products have grown from 
less than $2,000,000,000 annually to nearly $7,000,000,000, advancing 


us from the third to the front rank of the manufacturing nations of — 


the world. Our farm values have increased from a trifle over 
$3,000,000,000 in 1860 to more than $10,000,000,000 in 1880, producing 
an annual harvest value of more than $3,000,000,000. In 1860 Eng- 


land boasted of a national wealth as the result of her free-trade — 


policy of $30,000,000,000, while our aggregate accumulations’ were 
only $16,000, 000,000; but during these years of protection, under the 
most adverse canemminsteiicos: we have passed her in the industrial 


race, and, while she lags behind with only $42,000,000,000 of aceu- ; 


~ 


“~~ 


Se eles ee Tee Ga tie ee NN “sii, ale Ad aor bata kn a Oe er nema ein aed 


ain, 


JULIUS O, BURROWS. - 197 


mulated wealth, we are the proud possessors of more than $60,000,- 
000,000. 
% [submit therefore, that our protective system comes down to us _ 
|} not only with the recommendation of the fathers; but its wisdom 
4 {has been confirmed by a century of national experience. <A policy © 
of taxation thus doubly sanctioned and confirmed ought not lightly 
to be abandoned and destroyed; and yet it is proposed by the 
majority of the Committee on Ways and Means to reverse this benef- 
icent policy, and under the advantageous pressure of an overflow- 
ing Treasury assail and demolish our protective system. The 
authors of this measure assure us that it will work a reduction of 
the revenues $78,000,000 annually. To accomplish this it is pro- 
posed to take only $24,000,000 from internal taxation and the bal- 
ance of $54,000,000 from duties on imports. This reduction of $54,- 
000,000 on imports is sought to be secured by transferring from the 
dutiable to the free list a large number of articles, among them wool, 
lumber, salt, flax, and other products of the farm and factory, upon 
which a revenue was derived last year of $22,000,000, and the bal- 
ance of $32,000,000 is sought to be obtained by lowering the duties 
all along the line upon that false theory that in proportion as you 
_ ' Jower the duty on imports you will diminish the revenue derived 
therefrom. These are the three methods employed in this bill to se- 
cure the proposed reduction of $78,000,000. Now, I submit that in 
taking only $24,000,000 from internal taxation, while we are collect- 
ing annually $120,000,000 from this source, confirms the public belief 
that this administration and its supporters are more anxious to assail 
and impair our protective system than to relieve the Treasury of its 
- plethoric condition. While yielding to the general demand of all 
- parties for a reduction of the surplus they insist that such a re- 
sult shall be reached only through the methods of free trade. Hence 
— only $24,000,000 is to be taken from internal taxation while $54,000, - 
000 is to be secured by a revision of the tariff. 
- But what is the revision proposed by this bill? First by putting 
on the free-list articles which last year yielded a revenue of $22,000,- 
000. Now, all parties agree that anything and everything which is 
_not and cannot be produced in this country, and cannot therefore 
come in competition with any domestic industry, shall be admitted 
- free of duty. But the free-list in this bill goes far beyond that and 
exposes to foreign assault many of our most important industries, 
particularly those of agriculture. There is not a schedule of our 
tariff it does not invade. The great wool-growing interest of the 
country, a matter of prime necessity to a civilized people, only in 
the infancy of its development, capable of producing, if properly - 


Ee aa OR: Te eee Estee, hcg el ne Seman ey MUNA Ree EE cla a ea aS i 
sae ie fe eee ™ eet. SS er TEE eS | ELE Lae Pda tale 125 Ry AT Re a ot 
Lae sf i a ‘ Mw * h d 


178 JULIUS 0. BURROWS. 


fostered and encouraged, the material for the clothing of all our peo- 
ple, is to be exposed to a ruinous foreign competition which will 
surely prove its ultimate destruction with all the capital invested 
therein, The majority of the Committee on Ways and Means in 
their report on this bill seek to delude the people with the idea that 
free wool means cheaper wool, and with it cheaper clothing, and 
that the farmers can well afford to submit to the destruction of sheep- 
husbandry that they may thereby obtain cheaper woolen goods. 

That wool would be cheaper while our foreign rivals were en- 
gaged in destroying this domestic industry is quite possible; but 
when they have completed their work of demolition, when they have ; 
driven our flocks to the slaughter-pen and eliminated from our mar-~ 
ket an annual production of 800,000,000 pounds of domestic wool, we 
will find ourselves bound, hand and foot, manufacturers and con- 
sumers alike, at the mercy of the foreign producer. What restraint 
then will there be upon his power or cupidity? 

What I have said touching this industry will apply with equal 
force to the main body of the free-list. But I must pass on to the 
third method proposed, namely, the reduction of rates on the duti- 
able list, and here we enter the field of speculation. Now, I do not 
hesitate to affirm that, taking this measure as a whole, no man liv- 
ing, even if a member of the secret cabal that framed it, is audacious 
enough to predict with any degree of certainty the amount of reduc- 
tion it will secure. That the $24,000,000 taken from internal taxation 
and the $22,000,000 surrendered by the additions to the free-list will 
secure a reduction of $46,000,000 there can be no question. This 
much is certain. 

But whether the further reduction of $32,000,000 will follow by 
the lowering of duties isa matter of the vaguest speculation, with | 
the probabilities that such a course will augment rather than dimin- — 
ish the revenues. The natural tendency of such a policy will be to 
cripple and destroy competing American industries, stimulate impor- 

tations, and increase the surplus. Such a result is strikingly exem- 

plified in the history of our wool industry in connection with the 
tariff of 1883. By that act the duty on wool was slightly lowered, 
and what was the effect? Our flocks and fleeces diminished, impor- — . 
tations increased, and our revenue from this source nearly doubled. 
The number of our sheep fell off from 50,620,626 in 1884 to 44,759,314 
in 1887, a net loss of nearly 6,000,000 head in three years, with a cor- 
responding reduction in the wool clip from 308,000,000 pounds in 1884 F 
to 265,000,000 in 1887, a shrinkage of 43,000,000 pounds; while impor- — 
tations rapidly rose from 70,575,000 pounds in 1883 to 129,084,000 
pounds in 1886; increasing the revenue in spite of the lowering of a 


7 
p 


very Nee: - ee ae A hon to oe oe Vier Bees patel RM aeetien Carers agi i, fanaa £5 ay el it FP ai gate Jaf. RR oe ARR S a pas Ste) ach oe AeA 
wd 3 ; . : k= i SEN PO Re a eae ae a ie) 


“JULIUS C. BURROWS. 179 


duties from $3,174,628 in 1883 to $5,126,108 in 1887, By the act of 
1883 duties were lowered on wool, worsteds, knit goods, yarns, wear- 
ing apparel, and shoddy and kindred materials, and the revenue de- 


rived from the importations of these six articles during the three ~ 


years following this act were greater by $11,465,503 than during the 
three years immediately preceding. 
But I have alluded to this in this connection not so much for ite 


purpose of showing the impracticability of the proposed method as 


to call attention to the fact that the majority of the Committee on 
Ways and Means proposed to take only $24,000,000 from internal 
taxation, while a reduction of $54,000,000 is attempted to be secured 
by the lowering or total abolition of duties on imports in the interest 
of foreign rival industries and to the detriment and destruction of 
ourown. Thisfact alone is sufficient to confirm public apprehension 
and belief that the Democratic party, or at least the controlling wing 
of it, while professing an anxiety to relieve the people of unnecessary 


taxation, is much more anxious to destroy our protective system 
than to stop the accumulation of a needless surplus. With an easy 


and open way to a sure and ample reduction of the revenues without 
disturbing a single American industry or paralyzing a single arm of 
labor, yet the Democratic party declines to walk therein, preferring 
that other course, strewn with the wrecks of a nation’s experience 
and fraught with the utmost peril to all our interests and all our 


people. 


But this was to be expected. It is only following the general 
course commanded by the President in his annual message. True, 
in the exuberance of his zeal for free trade he advises no modifica- 
tion whatever of our internal-revenue system, but that the entire 
reduction should be secured by a revision of the tariff which should 
abolish all duties on some of our most important industries and lower 
others sufficiently to secure the desired end; but even the free-trade 
wing of the Democratic party lacked the courage to at once occupy _ 
this advanced position. [Applause.] For prudential reasons it — 
seemed advisable to move with greater caution. That the plan of — 
the President and his party, if carried into execution, even as pro- — 
posed in this bill, would-prove disastrous to American industries and _ 


American labor cannot be questioned. It is impossible to secure | 


the necessary reduction of revenue by the abolition or lowering of — 
duties without exposing our domestic industries to the most ruinous : 
foreign competition. But the President seeks to allay public appre- 
hension in this regard by declaring that in the execution of this plan 


~ eare will be taken not to cripple or destroy our manufactures or | 
work ‘‘loss of employment to the workingman or the lessening of _ 


PME REE SNe Lire ty Seer Moe Fe es aye ep gp ais Dane ws OUR hn Yu ae at ee CHS aT Per chit OR) PRR cir a na a a cc 


180 JULIUS 0. BURROWS. 


his wages.” As if his plan could be carried out ‘without working 
such a result. . 
As well might the surgeon, having announced his intention to — 
remove the heart of his patient, seek to allay his fears by the 
assurance that he would not disturb his circulation or impair his 
physical energies. [Laughter and applause.] One is as preposter- 4 
ous as the other. But the President, and I suppose the authors and 
advocates of this measure, will endeavor to induce the American 
people to submit to this suicidal operation by administering some 
sort of narcotic, which for the moment will dethrone their judgment , 
and make them oblivious to the dangers of the experiment. And ¥ 
here let me say there is nothing so conducive to this state of insensi- 
bility as the seductive influence of that theory that a duty on im- 
ports is a tax on the consumer. Once induce the people to believe 
that they are unjustly taxed and there is no political quackery they 
will not endure which gives promise of relief. Conscious of this 
fact, the President in his annual message reasserts in the most posi- 
tive manner that theory, which I had supposed was long since ex- 
ploded, that a duty imposed upon an imported article by so much 
_ enhances the price of such article to the consumer, and that there- — 
fore the removal of such duty would proportionately reduce the 
price. To show that I do not misrepresent the views of the Presi- 
dent in this regard I beg to quote the following : 


But our present tariff laws, the vicious, inequitable, and illogical source of 
unnecessary taxation, ought to be at once revised and amended. These laws, 
as their primary and plain effect, raise the price to consumers of all articles 
imported and subject to duty by precisely the sum paid for such duties. Thus 
the amount of the duty measures the tax paid by those who purchase for use 
these imported articles. Many of these things, however, are raised or manu- 
factured in our own country, and the duties now levied upon foreign goods 
and products are called protection to these home manufactures, because they 
render it possible for those of our people who are manufacturers to make these 
taxed articles and sell them for a price equal to that demanded for the im- 
ported goods that have paid customs duty. So it happens that while compara- 
tively a few use the imported articles, millions of our people, who never use 
and never saw any of the foreign products, purchase and use things of the ~ 
same kind made in this country, and pay therefor nearly or quite the same 
enhanced price which the duty adds to the imported articles. Those who buy 
imports pay the duty charged thereon into the public Treasury, but the great — 
majority of our citizens, who buy domestic articles of the same class, pay a 
sum at least approximately equal to this duty to the home manufacturer. This 
reference to the operation of our tariff laws is not made by way of instruc- ae 
tion, but in order that we may be constantly reminded of the manner ip Px 


& 


r Basel taal i TA aN Me ae SS Say gE Sak Meas may Pa a yf (i pa ates ge ©. ‘“ 
Y Farin Way ie ee Peart § - 


JULIUS 0. BURROWS. 181 
which they impose a burden upon those who consume domestic products as 
well as those who consume imported articles, and thus create a tax upon 


all our people. 


I should have thought the insensate pen with which the President 


wrote that paragraph would have refused to record the error, If it 


could have spoken it would have said to the President, ‘‘The very 


pen with which you write this folly is cheaper by one-half than 


before the duty was imposed.” [Applause.] But not only in the 
paragraph quoted is this theory affirmed, but the whole tenor of the 
message is in harmony with this expressed utterance. The Presi- 


dent seems actually to believe that a duty imposed upon an imported _ 


article by so much enhances the cost of such article to the consumer, . 
and is therefore a direct tax upon him to the amount of such duty, 
and therefore that the lessening or removal of such duty would by 
so much cheapen the article to the purchaser. He affirms with 
equal confidence that the duty imposed upon an imported article not 
only raises the price of such foreign article, but at the same time 
advances in equal degree the price of the entire domestic product, 


‘and then to aggravate the seeming injustice we are reminded that 


while the Treasury is benefited only to the extent of the duty col- 
lected, the enhanced price of the domestic product goes into the 
pocket of the manufacturer to swell his already ill-gotten fortune. 


This is the substance, the beginning and the end of the President’s 


argument in support of. the policy he champions, and I doubt not it 


will be echoed and re-echoed by every free-trader in the United 


__ States, as it has been hailed with unrestrained delight by every free- 


trader in England. 


The gentleman from Texas asserts the same theory, and the 
whole burden of his speech is based upon the false assumption that a 
duty is a tax paid by the consumer. He says if the laboring man 


pays $10 for a suit of clothes, and a duty of 100 per cent. is added, it 


advances the price to $20, which inures to the benefit of the manu- 
facturer, and robs the laborer. I am not surprised that the President 
should fall into this error, but it is unpardonable in the chairman of 
the Committee on Ways and Means. 

But what answer is to be made to this theory ? There is one at 


least comprehensive and complete. It is not true. I commend to 


the President his admonition to others, to remember ‘‘it is a condi- 


tion which confronts us, not a theory;” and that condition is an 


_ absolute refutation of his theory. [Applause.] It is not true thata 


protective duty is a tax paid by the consumer. It is not true that a 
protective duty enhances by so much the price of the article, It ig 


182 JULIUS C. BURROWS. 


not true that the duty on the foreign product raises by so much the 


whole volume of the competing domestic product; and in support of 
this denial I can summon as unimpeachable witnesses every estab- 
lished manufacturing industry in the United States. Call the roll of 
your industries, your iron, steel, glass, pottery, the whole array of 
American industries, and they will bear concurrent testimony to the 
fact that the duty of which you complain has been the means of 
reducing the price of their products to the consumer. I challenge 
any man to name the product of a single well-established American 


industry that cannot be bought cheaper to-day under our protective 


system than during any period of our history under free trade or a 
tariff for revenue only. 

Take as an illustration our steel-rail industry, and let us see if the 
theory of the President is correct. The first Bessemer-steel rail 
made in this country was in 1865. At that time there was a duty of 
45 per cent. on the foreign product, which continued until January 
1, 1871, when the act of Congress went into effect which imposed a 
specific duty of $28 a ton. In 1867 steel rails were selling in the 
American market for $166 a ton in currency, or $188 in gold. In 1870 

the price had fallen to $106.75, when the duty of $28 was imposed. 
- Now, if the theory of the President be correct, the imposition of the 
- duty of $28 would have had the effect of advancing the price by the 
amount of such duty from $106.75 a ton to $134.75. But what in 
fact was the result? Under the stimulating effect of this protection 
the product of our steel-rail mills rose from 2,277 tons in 1867 to 
2,101,904 tons in 1887, giving investment to millions of capital and 
employment to thousands of laborers, while the price went down 
from $166 a ton in 1867 to $31.50 in March, 1888. In the light of this 
- example what becomes of the theory that the duty enhances the cost 
.and becomes a tax upon the consumer ? 

Let me say to the President, ‘‘It is a condition that confronts us, 
not a theory.” 

Take the case of ‘‘ blankets,” to which the chairman allaneg A 
pair of 5-pound blankets were recently imported at the lowest possi- 
ble cost. The statement of the cost, duty paid, is as follows: 


Pah in gland at wholesale..’.s.s¢3 ses'snicn is sae sane ss = cep ebm eee $4.45 
POV ICEA a's a's op. suit ows oe sa 80d oR be wap Wee tes Reels oink oan eee ee 4.25 
MUU OCS as ss 5.5) sea 3 0 s¥ ass qageasaeee semesdeniany) te eieeee .65 

OUNU athe ner AOnG's sty 5 Wises ss Tin sidoo ne aval ats Sema e eR LT ge Onto gn 9.35 


If the theory is true, these blankets ought to sell for $9.35 a pair; 


but, as a matter of fact, American blankets of precisely the same fe me 


~ 


i 
r = ar eh , 
AGS} i. « 


‘ = 
2 
=a ‘ 
. 


oe 


~ + 


os 


LT A Tee eS a ee eee ee 
. 22 toe ~ on % -. ¥ es ¥ 


JULIUS 0. BURROWS. 183 


weight and quality were selling at that time for $5.20, What be- 
comes of the theory that the duty is added to the cost ? [Applause. ] 

Buta more forcible illustration, if possible, of the unsoundness of 
the President’s theory is found in the history of a recently estab- 


lished industry in his own State. Previous to 1884 there was not a 


pound of soda-ash manufactured in the United States. We consume 
annually 175,000 tons in the manufacture of glass and other Ameri- 


can products. Previous to 1884 we imported every pound of it at an 


average cost of $48 a ton. A duty of $5 was imposed, and the Solvay 
Process Company was organized at Syracuse, the only one on this 


hemisphere, at a cost of $1,500,000, with a capacity of 50,000 tons 


annually. It commenced manufacturing soda-ash in January, 1884. 
How has it affected the price of this commodity? Was the duty of 
$5 added to the $48, advancing the cost to $53 a ton? On the con- 
trary, it fell in the American market as low as $28 a ton in three 
years, a saving to the people annually of $20.a ton on the entire con- 
sumption of the 175,000 tons, or $3,500,000. Again I say to the Presi- 
dent, ‘‘ It is a condition that confronts us, not a theory.” But Ineed 
not multiply instances; they are as numerous as our industries, You 


cannot touch a manufactured article on the farm or in the home, the 


product of a protected American industry that has not been made 


cheaper by reason of such protection. Why, there are many things 


the market value of which is lower than the duty, and how idle, 


’ . therefore, to say that the duty is added to the cost. But the diffi- 


culty with the President’s theory is he forgets that the price of 
-acommodity does not depend upon the rate of duty, but rather upon 


the great law of supply and demand —a law universal in its applica- 


tion and unvarying in its results. If the supply of a given article be 


limited and the demand great, the price will be high; and, on the 


contrary, if the supply be abundant and the demand limited, the 
price will be low. Therefore it is if by a protective tariff we can © 
establish and maintain a domestic industry which otherwise, by 
reason of unrestrained foreign competition, could not exist, we will 
thereby increase the product of such industry and inevitably bring 
down the price. Alexander Hamilton, nearly a century ago, formu- 
lated this law when he said: 


But though it were true that the immediate and certain effect of a tariff 
was an increase of price, it is universally proved that the contrary is the ulti- 
mate effect with every successful manufacture. When a domestic manufact- 
ure has attained to perfection, and has engaged in the prosecution of it a com- 


petitive number of persons, it can be afforded and accordingly seldom or never _ 


fails to be sold cheaper, in process of time, than the foreign article for which 
it isa substitute, The internal competition which takes place soon does away 


os i aie a ol + ed s oA Tbe Meee we ee a a en Se Acree, eek A ree i & freA 8 A oS ~ hy Sete ts ee eeees! ae 
ran as vig Beet ee? MR ete a PT TS i CRs a, MR GEOR hue) ht AS PAN Oe pL wl OBI Ssh > Sad) tae 
ym 8A Gee age tS ea PS rg ales ontet ae oe Blea OL 6 i nhl : , me 


Se Geis A 
184 JULIUS C, BURROWS. 
with everything like monopoly and reduces the price of the article to the 


minimum of a reasonable profit on the capital employed. This accords with 
the reason of the thing and with experience. * 


But further comment is unnecessary to expose the fallacy of the 
assumption that a duty imposed upon an imported article by so much 
enhances the cost of such article to the consumer and therefore be- 
comes to that extent a tax upon him. 

But the gentleman from Texas, while admitting that wages are 
higher here than in Europe, denies that it is attributable to our 
protective tariff. Ifso, he asks why are not wages uniform through- 
out the United States ? He might as well assert that because manu- 
facturing industries are not equally developed throughout this coun- 
try therefore their establishment and maintenance is not attributable 
to our protective system. It is not pretended that a protective 
tariff, in and of itself, affects wages; but it does build up manu- 
facturing industries, creates a demand for labor, and as a consequence 
increases its compensation. ‘Wages are not uniform throughout the 
United States because the cost of production is not uniform. But 
the gentleman charges that labor is not sharing in the benefits of our 
protective system. Let me quote from Edward Atkinson, whom the 
gentleman pronounces “‘one of the clearest thinkers and writers on 


political economy of the present day :” 


In the judgment of the commissioner of savings-banks and of many others 
who are competent to form an opinion, at least three-fourths of the present de- 
posits in these banks belong to those who are strictly of the working classes in 
the limited sense in which those whose daily work is necessary to their daily 
bread make use of that term. This system of savings-banks is practically 


limited to New England and the Middle States. The total sum on deposit — 


in all those States is now computed at $1,100,000,000, at an average of 
$356 to each depositor. If the system were extended throughout the country, 
and the deposit per capita of the people of the United States were equal to 
that of Massachusetts, the total sum would amount to somewhat over $8, 400,- 


000,000. 2 


Another fact may be cited which fairly sustains the general statement 
that those who do the actual work of production are now securing to theit 
own use a larger share than ever before of the joint product of labor and 
capital. 


Again this author says: 


Wages of mechanics in Massachusetts were 25 per cent. more in 1885 than - 
in 1860, while the purchasing power of money was 26 per cent. greater, and — 


the workingman could either raise his standard of living, or on the same stand- 
ard save one-third of his wages, 


a 
= 


r ‘JULIUS ¢, BURROWA 185 

But the chairman of the committee suggests that this protective 
system is crippling our commerce. He forgets that in 1860, the close 
of the last period of a low tariff, our éxports were only $336, 576,057, 
and imports $356,616,119, leaving a balance of trade against us of 


$20,040,062. In 1880 our exports had risen to $835,638,658, and im- 


ports $667,954,746, leaving a balance of trade in our favor of $167,- 
683,912, an amount one-half as large as our entire export trade in 


1860. Our total commerce in 1860 aggregated only $687,000,000, while 


in 1880 it reached $1,500,000,000. [Applause.] 
It is an interesting fact that during the period of a low tariff, from 


- 1848 to 1860 inclusive, there was but one year in which the balance of 


trade was in our favor, and the net balance against us in these 
thirteen years was $396,216,161, drawn out of the country in gold to 
pay for foreign goods. Yet during the last thirteen years, under a 
protective tariff, only one year has the balance of trade been against 
us, while the aggregate in our favor has reached the magnificent sum 
of $1,612,659,755. [Applause.] 
The country will not suffer from changing foreign trade from 
$400, 000,000 against us to $1,600,000,000 in our favor. 
But the gentleman from Texas, referring to duties on imports, 
characterizes them as ‘‘ war taxes;” that they still remain, and that 


they are heavier to-day than the average during the last five years 


of the existence of hostilities; that the average rate of duty during 


the last five years, from 1883 to 1887, inclusive, on dutiable goods 


amounted to 44.51 per cent., and that during the last year the aver- 


age duty was 47.10 per cent.” It will be observed that the gentle- 


man speaks only of dutiable imports, omitting all imports received 


- free of duty.. The average rate on the entire importations he pru- 


dently withholds, making his calculation not only misleading, but 


- entirely valueless. To illustrate: The duty of Cognac oil is]533 per 


cent. If everything else were omitted free of duty-—-if after the 


close of the war we had put all else on the free-list—it would be lit- 


erally true that the average rate on dutiable goods would be 533 per 


cent., and greater now than during the war, when it was only 31 per 
cent., but it would convey no idea of the average on our entire im- 
portations, [Applause.] We are paying a duty of 134 per cent. on 
rice in the husks, and if that was the only dutiable article imported 
it would be exactly true to say that the average rate on dutiable im- 


ports was 134 per cent., but the statement would be as valueless as it 


would be misleading. Yet the gentleman takes the value of our du- 


- tiable imports, $450,325,321, as the basis of his calculation and the 
- duty collected thereon, $212,632,423, and deduces the hiss. ad var 
sah rate of 47,10 per cent, for 1887, 


186 JULIUS 0. BURROWS 


But if he had added to the dutiable imports the value of goods 
admitted free of duty, namely, $233,930,659, his aggregate of impor- 


tations for 1887 would be $683,418,980, which would reduce his aver- 


age rate to 31 per cent. So the statement that during the last five — 


years, from 1883 to 1887, inclusive, that the average rate on dutiable 
goods is 44.51 per cent. is true; but if the entire importations are in- 
cluded, the rate will fall to 80 per cent. The same miscalculation 
destroys the force of his statement that the average rates to-day are 
heavier than during the war. We have seen that taking our entire 


imports the average to-day is 31 per cent., while during the war, — 


from 1861 to 1865, the average was 30 per cent. But this average of 
1 per cent. higher is attributable largely to lower prices, following” 
the inexorable law that as prices decline the per cent. of ad valorem 


rates increase. If the value of an imported article be $10, and the 
duty $1, the equivalent ad valorem rate would be 10 percent, If — 


the value of the same article should fall to $5, the duty remaining 
the same, $1, the equivalent ad valorem rate would be 20 per cent. 
And so the entire statement of the gentleman is not only misleading 
and fallacious, but ceases to be interesting or instructive. [Ap- 
 plause.] 


But special effort has been made and is ae persisted in to in- 


duce the American farmer to believe that a protective tariff is hos- 
tile to his best interest and his prosperity would be promoted by an 
abandonment of that policy. How far this effort may be successful 


it is impossible to forecast; but this much may be affirmed with ab- — 
solute certainty, unless the results of established law are uncertain — 
and experience is no longer a safe guide, that any course which crip- 
ples or destroys our manufacturing interests and deprives labor of 


its employment therein will seriously disturb and impair the pros- 


perity of our agricultural interests. Andrew Jackson was not mis- — 
taken when he said: ay 


Upon the success of our manufactures, as the handmaid of agriculture and — 
commerce, depends, in a great measure, the independence of our country. 


Among the advantages conferred upon the farmer by our protec 


tive tariff is that derived from a direct protection to the products of 
his farm and the industries incident thereto as shown by the follow- 
ing table: 


‘i Wool at 80 centsa pound or less, 10 cents; at over 30 cents a pound, 12 
cents. Beef and pork, 1 cent a pound. Hams and bacon, 2 cents a pound. 
Butter, 4 cents a pound. Lard, 2 cents a pound. Cheese, 4 cents a pound. 
Grapes, 20 per cent, ad jvalorem. Wheat, 20 cents a bushel. Oats, 10 cents a 


bushel, Corn, 10 centsa bushel, Rye, 15 cents a bushel. Barley, 15 cents. eee 


vera 


~ he) t 


wa 


o Fi 


5 Poe Sa . si Baty 
‘JULIUS 0. BURROWS. 187 
a bushel. Potatoes, 15 cents a bushel. Hay, $2aton. Live animals, 20 per 


cent. ad valorem. Beeswax, 20 per cent. ad valorem. Vinegar, 10 cents a 
gallon. Honey, 20 cents a gallon. Fruit, shade, and ornamental trees, shrubs, — 


- etc., 20 per cent. ad valorem. All vegetables not otherwise provided for, 10 
- per cent. ad valorem. Rice cleaned, 24 cents per pound. Wheat flour, 20 per 


cent ad valorem. Tobacco (unmanufactured), 35 cents per pound. Sugar, 14 
to 84 cents per pound. Rice flour and rice meal, 20 per cent. ad valorem. 
Extract of meat, 20 per cent. ad valorem. Barley, pearled or hulled, 4 cent 


per pound. Barley malt, 20 cents per bushel. Corn meal, 10 cents per 


bushel. Oat meal, + cent per pound. Rye flour, 4 cent per pound. Potato 


: and corn starch, 2 cents per pound. Pickles and sauces not otherwise provided - 


for, 85 per cent. ad valorem. Garden seeds, 20 per cent. ad valorem. Hemp 


: seed, } cent per pound. Currants, 1 cent per pound. Apples, 10 per eent. ad 


valorem. Hops,8 cents per pound. Milk preserved or condensed, 20 per cent. 


. ad valorem. Flax straw, $5 a ton. Flax, not dressed, $20 a ton. Flax, 


dressed, $40 a ton. Tow of flax or hemp, $10 a ton. Bristles, 15 cents a 


; pound. Tallow, 1 cent a pound. Flax-seed or linseed, 20 cents per bushel. 


That the farmer should still further be protected in some of these 


? products there can be no question, and yet it is to be observed that 


the bill now under consideration strikes down with merciless hand 
many of the most important agricultural interests of the country by 
_ placing them on the free-list. When it is remembered that there 
_ was brought into this country last year, exclusive of tea, coffee, and 


“gugar, $57,000,000 of agricultural products in oémpetitton Ee, our 


home interests, the policy proposed by this bill which would still 


Oe ta Ny he 4) poten dee DRS BSA, 
of mek D rid si ped i 


further expose the farmer to foreign competition will not be apt to 
receive the approval of our agricultural interests. But while this 
direct protection is of importance to the farmer, the indirect bene- 
- fits accruing to him from the diversification of our industries are 
- much greater and beyond the possibility of calculation. In this lies 
the chief advantage. Every farmer tills the soil for a double pur- 
pose, first, to supply the necessities for himself and his household, 


and, secondly, to secure a surplus with which he may obtain those 


: erecles of necessity and luxury which cannot be produced from the 


soil. 

For the disposition of this surplus he requires a market, and that 
market which yields the best returns will be to him the most advan- 
tageous. There are but two markets open to him, the home market 


: and the foreign. Canit be possible that the emer can be deluded 


into a belief that a policy which destroys his home market and forces 
~ him into the distant markets of the world with his surplus products, 


: : with all the attending and enormous cost of transportation, will re- 


. dound MS his advantage? Every farmer understands that the nearer 


Si PETA AON he IR Cee OPN CRO MC SE RELIES Bo Me San Oe ei oC eS 
SAA te te oo eetGry : So SevAGF, Ser 3 
f RENTS Aa} : nA hae S 


188 JULIUS C. BURROWS. 


his market to his farm the more abundant his profits. Therefore, 
any policy which tends to diversify our industries and give employ- 
ment to a large class of our people outside of agriculture, and who 
_ thus become consumers of the surplus products of the farm at home, 
must inure to the benefit of the American farmer; and any policy 
which tends to diminish these industries and force the capital and 
labor employed therein onto the farm, to become producer rather 
than consumer, must from necessity increase the agricultural product 
while at the same time lessening the demand therefor. 1 can con- 
ceive of no calamity more appalling than that which would overtake 
our vast agricultural interests by the destruction of our manufac- 
turing Industries and the consequent annihilation of our home 
market. The importance to agriculture of a diversification of our 
industries and consequent creation of a home demand for the surplus 
product of the farm was strikingly set forth by Alexander Hamilton 
nearly a century ago. 


This idea of an extensive domestic market for the surplus produce of the soil 
is of the first consequence. It is of all things that which must effectially gon- 
duce to a flourishing state of agriculture. To secure such a market there is no 
other expedient than to promote manufacturing establishments. Manufact- 
urers, who constitute the most numerous class after the cultivators of the land, 
are for that reason the principal consumers of the surplus of their labor. 


But the advantage of such a policy does not rest for its support 
upon atheory. It is affirmed by experience, and it may be well to 
again remind the President that ‘‘it is a condition that confronts 
us, not a theory.” It is estimated that to-day our population is not 
less than 60,000,000, of which only 20,000,000 are actually engaged in 
any gainful occupation, 9,000,000 of whom are engaged in agricult- 
ure, leaving 11,000,000 employed in other pursuits. Nine million - 
farmers are feeding a nation of 60,000,000 of people. How does this 
advantage the farmers? The estimated value of the products of our 
_ farms, exclusive of cotton and tobacco, is $3,000,000,000 annually, 
and yet 94 per cent. of this enormous product is taken in our own 
market and consumed by our own people. The farmers arecom- 
pelled to export only 6 per cent. of their products. In this connec- 
tion it is worthy of note that while the value of our manufactures 
reaches the almost fabulous sum of $7,000,000,000 annually, yet more 
than 90 per cent. of this is consumed within our borders. It is 
estimated that the value of our industrial products of farm and. 
factory will aggregate annually $11,000,000,000, and yet nearly 
$10,000,000,000 of this is disposed of in our own market and con- 
sumed by our own people. And yet, with a home market of such 


AY 
ae, ys eee 
va Sa ag a eR 


a Ne ae RS it LO NT Am 


ape ee JULIUS ©. BURROWS. 189 


* absorbing cause ‘built up and sustained by a diversification of 
our industries, the advocates of free trade are constantly holding up 
the phantom of the markets of the world as the one thing chiefly to 
be desired. 
_ Of what value to the American farmer are the markets of tite 
world in comparison with his home market? How much of the 
farmer’s surplus products does the world’s market require to-day ? 
Before dropping the gubstance for the shadow it would be well to 
inquire the extent of the foreign demand for the products of our 
farm. Ifa policy is adopted which destroys the home market and 
forces the American farmers into the markets of the world, when his 
- _ vessels are laden with the products of his farm, to what ports on the 
' _ inhabitable globe will he direct his course? Not to South America, 
: nor Asia, nor Africa, nor Australasia, nor the islands of the sea, for 
in all these there is practically no demand for our agricultural pro- 
ducts, and there is no prospect that there ever will be, for these 
countries are abundantly supplied with agricultural laborers and 
surplus lands. Europe is the only country which does not feed its 
own people, and even there Russia, Germany, Turkey, Roumania, 
-  Servia, and Hungary produce their own food supply, and excluding 
_,, Germany, furnish a surplus for the European markets. Outside of 
Great Britain, therefore, there is practically no demand for our 
agricultural products, and with the rich fields of India open to her 
it is not difficult to discern that the time is not far distant when 
even this demand will cease. 
~The chairman of the committee, in his recent speech, declared 
- that— 

We are the great betenliaed people of the world, and have been feeding 
__ the people of Europe, and must receive European goods in exchange or fail to 
-- export our surplus, and thus surfeit the home market and reduce prices. 

. *This hallucination of feeding the people of Europe is easily dis- 
_  pelled. As bread is the main staff of European life, let us see where 
itis obtained. The population of Europe is about 350,000,000, and 
the consumption of wheat about 33 bushels per head, of which 
: scarcely more than half a bushel is required from North and South 
= America, Asia, and Australasia. In three-fourths of the entire area 
a of Kurope the consumption does not amount to 2 bushels per head, 
and nearly every grain of that is produced at home. On about half 
~ of the area of Kurope there is a surplus to spare to the other half. 
: The largest consumer of wheat in the world, France, was also the 
largest producer less than fifteen years ago, and has now about as 
large an area and product as ever, and needs of foreign wheat only 
about 10 per cent. of her supply. 


# 


AA ae Se Se eh Sc Oe Pee ON nay ag oe Sos eure eo Pi oe Or ae EN ad, BE Re i a eb Ie 
- . Ror a ‘ ta ¥ = ‘wiatic ~ ae 


Pe 


190 SRTTOS Co BURROWS 


The 80,000,000 people of Russia live mostly on rye, as do the — 


people of Germany and Central Europe, and produce it all them- 
selves. Many of the people of the North of Europe consume a large 
proportion of maize. Some in the North of Europe subsist largely 
on oat-meal. The consumption of all cereals in Europe usually 


averages at least 16 bushels per head, of which 3 pecks per capita — 


come from other continents. Feeding the people of Kurope! Four 
continents combining to supply a per capita deficiency of 3 pecks 


per capita in the fifth. A failure of one-half peck in this deficiency 


sends prices rapidly upward; an excess of one-half peck produces an 


instant and sudden fall in India and Dakota. An additional half 


bushel would sprout in the bin or be fed to farm animals without a 
foreign offer. This is so well known that it would be charity to 
attribute to ignorance the pretense of enlarging the exportation of 


wheat by low tariffs, or no tariffs, or by any other device short of 


the creation of a few million more foreign mouths. 

If we do so little in feeding Europe with bread, still less do we 
supply the meat she consumes. Last year we exported 162,000,000 
pounds of beef, fresh and salted; 188,000,000, or four-fifths of it, 
went to Great Britain. Very little is ever wanted elsewhere, and 
Englishmen are now straining every nerve and spending British 
gold in enterprises to supply their country with frozen and canned 
beef from Australia and the Argentines. Of 505,000,000 pounds of 
bacon, pork, and hams exported, 380,000,000 pounds, or three-fourths 
of it, went to Great Britain and a part of the remainder to Canada. 
Scarcely a nation in the world, Great Britain excepted, depends 
upon foreign nations for its meat supply. It is a necessity of their 
existence that they should supply themselves. It is the same with 
cheese, the only other food product of which there is an appreciable 
deficiency in Europe. Its market is confined chiefly to Great 
Britain, and exportation cannot be enlarged at all without a reduc- 
tion in price, and any sudden extension is a practical and physical 


impossibility. The rich there buy all they can eat now, and the 
poor all they can afford. The requirement is fixed and limited with 


the least possible element of elasticity, so that the foreign demand 
can only fluctuate with the annual variations of the home supply. 
This statement should dispose of the boastful and silly pretense so 
glibly and frequently made by free-traders, of feeding Europe, and 


ought to mark the exit of America in the rdle of the world’s nurse _ 


and eaterer to the universe. [Applause. ] 

Where then on the face of the globe can the American farmer 
market his surplus? At home or nowhere. This home market, 
therefore, should be to him the object of his deepest solicitude and 


PT MO LT OP ee 


JULIUS 0. BURROWS. ! 191 


protecting care, for upon it the future of agriculture in this country 

_ depends. I will submit here a table showing the value of the lead- 
ing products of American farms in 1886, according to estimates of 

the Department of Agriculture, together with the amount consumed 

-at home and exported, which demonstrates at a glance the impor- 
tance of the home over the foreign market, 


Value of products of American agriculture in 1886, and of the proportion 
exported in the fiscal year 1886-’87. 


Exportation. 
Production, 
Products. farm value. Export Par 
value, Farm value. cent 

LS 

Breadstuffs: (2 
ETI rss tas oi eee NS CRUE Solis a ES Bite $610,311,000 $20,052,704 $11,790,046 1.9 
NUMYO ELD INS feces deus « vite bs Ride Cuawrec et 314,226,020 142,666,563 87,668,833 | 27.9 
CTH ME WAR 7 eR ws AOE ER CIC CRS Ce RT OI 186,137,930 635,657 843,659 we 
BGEIOVS Sess cs cece scot ss EP ae eee 31,840,510 853,405 691,809 PED 
PR. Mivardict tists > tctace a's \e'doe Aes eh Some nee neg 13,181,330’ 227,971 197,687 15 
Bie WORD Weiss deitacu se eireie:s aisveleuiecc sale Ci4O5: TOO ae te ett i aes se eal | eee 
RUICOM FEE e e acste toes e ONE as eats coeay cee 5,000,000 29,204 26,284 a 

y GEBE aK cca <b. tv ce Me cis exe oaterie Rrmstars 1,167,161,910 | 164,465,504 100,718.318 8.3 

INEGB ES tote tee alsa s sel See ete hae hm ewes 748,000,000 78,152,731 62,522,185 8.4 

POUrY PTOAUCUS. 66. o sc. ecccse ee eect i eenes 186,000,000 88,970 TUL VOR peste 

Hides, hair, etc....... 24 SIM AE Calas Fe mid bellow 93,000,000 1,101,203 825,902 9 

_ Dairy products: 
PTGUOD: corse Seas > Nene wa enie CR eae. om eats 192,000,000 1,983,698 1,487,773 8 
Cheese........ 0606 Rate era aiiie 4 Soca o aala ale 82,000,000 7,594, 633 6,455,438 20.2 
MVE rent ete watts ssc.e's 6 ote « CASRN AO Pe 156,000,000 258,971 181,279 it 
Mebaliie s sdeee< 32 ir tealde | eae 380,000,000 9,837,302 8,124,490 | 2.1 

Textile fibers: . ' 

RECECOU saree siececuhs en GueAe Ad naaiace vemeales 257,295,327 206, 222,057 177,895,501 | 69.1 
EUG Oh De SS FT Si ME Ae ea ga ve 77,000,000 8,002 70,202 1 
Hemp, flax, etc................ stteteees D000 COO nT eis eters aos a! | leet Ulasds eed Siegert arms 
- Total. °........-.000. Tee Wen oc seed 1 843;290,827 206,300,059 177,965,703 51.8 

Vegetables: 

METIS: DOLALOCK 3. 5+ sp Sas ences sees es ive? 78,441,940 318,259 238,694 333 
Sweet potatoes 720 000.000: vs Fae eee IEG highs cae eee. cere ere oe 
Peas and beans........ Paonia ese nisieta sini 13,800,000 562,864 450,291 3.3 
Market gardens ERS: 68,000,000 427,530 256.518 4 

PETALS ee aaa visi eich cha) Gears cere sd oe 175,000,000 2,669.965 1,601,979 9 

LCA pile Care aii ner nein chine sree te erg ahs 353,487,699 218,006 BOA tee ae 

ICIS Oe ear loe vet acthces eas eecok Gian helene oc 89,082,118 25,637,983 20,510,886 | 52.5 

Liki J's. cat auger enh JR SUR ITS a bat aS oe 8,500,000 54,970 46, 72Dclaaes 

Sugar and sirup, including honey.......... 33,500,000 12.976; OGD Eins Osa cena ne 

Clover and: grass S€eCd)...Fiji0 veces cece vans 15,000,000 911,898 638,329 4.3 

VIG E ite cn incre ee Ped oleae Doe aE Moelle cats 10,000,000 215,171 129,103 1.3 

COUT Peat es Sai aeilebiee! a I Ba oa a 3,727,218, 994 503,938,476 374,230,603 10.0 


From this table it will be observed that the American farmer dis- 


| poses of about 90 per cent., and excluding cotton and tobacco more 
than 94 per cent., of his farm products at home, and no amount of 


ee a ee” nee SP OF PIS nF Fe nS Ue ae ee » gta Oe a + Ol? ae ae - 
Re ae Beet ge eee, eaPyaL So age SOA at ens 2 Ve een eee is Cae a rae 


en Seles) 


192 JULIUS 0. BURROWS. 


sophistry can delude him into the belief that it is for his interest to 
destroy or lessen this home demand. 

His interest lies rather in the direction of an enlargement of our 
manufacturing industries and a corresponding increase of the num- 
ber of consumers, that he may ultimately find a home market for 
the entire product of his farm. Another consideration of incaleu- - 
lable value to the farmer must not be lost sight of, and that is the 
home market is a permanent and steady one. No business can be 
profitably prosecuted without some assurance of stability. If the 
farmer was forced to an entire dependence upon foreign markets for 
the sale of his products it would be impossible to calculate with any 
degree of certainty the extent of that demand, dependent as it 
would be upon the condition of the foreign supply, and the result ~ 
would be, one year his surplus would find steady and profitable sale 
and the next perish in his fields. But with a steady market at 
home, created and sustained by our diversified industries, the de 
mand is steady, and every farmer knows that when he sows he can 
reap with profit. Another advantage to the American farmer from 
the establishment and maintenance of manufacturing industries is 
the enhanced value of his acres. You cannot build up anywhere a 
prosperous manufacturing industry without enhancing the value’ of 
the farm lands adjacent thereto. Cast your eye over the map of 
the Republic and indicate the localities where industries are the 
most diversified and the fewest people are engaged in agriculture, 
and there you will find the highest-priced farm lands. Mark the 
localities where farming is the chief occupation of the people and 
other industries are the least developed; there you will find farm — 
lands of the least value. To demonstrate the’truth of this assertion I 
will insert a table in which the States and Territories are divided 
into four groups, in the first of which is embraced that portion of 
the country having less than 30 per cent. of the people engaged in 
agriculture; the second, over 30 and less than 50; the third, over 50 
and less than 70, and the fourth having 70 per ‘cont, ane over en- 
gaged in agriculture: 


Value Fer 

Value. of cent. in 

Classes.. Acres, farms. abre, | agricul- 
3 4 ture. 

SES MOTI Te AST eee FSS ETE Pea NIE LONE TRG ae ae 

bio eens eae eae ee eee 77,250,742 | $2,985,641,197 yt Bl 
BeeGudnery Ssaruesies epee 5 ee ae 112,321,257 | 3,430,915,767 42 
Wiel es cee eed pecs ee tows 237,873,040 | 3,218, 108,970 18. 33 58 


Weurtbecgis eres Le TAC eae Es et 108,636,796 562,430,842 | 5.18] 77 


the people are engaged in agriculture the average value of farm ~ 


FE. 04 ae en ee ee aS ee. Pay | 8 PORTA | at oO, ey Ga ieks Ses iat ok ee Tie ED ate ate 
Pre ot eS ay Pe ec aye Re fie Sl tia Set cai Sia One y pi asthe) 


me. 7 JULIUS 0. BURROWS. — 198 


From this table it will be discerned that where 77 per cent. of 


lands is only a trifle over $5 an acre, while where only 18 per cent. 
_ are engaged in agriculture farm lands average over $88 per acre. 
What is true in the country at large is equally true in counties and 
States. The principal manufacturers in Pennsylvania are to be 
found in thirteen counties, and the average value of farm land 
within these counties is $86.73 per acre, while in the remaining 
- counties it is only $42.02. The farm lands in the twelve chief man- 
_ufacturing counties of Ohio average $67.85 per acre, while in the 
balance ‘of the State they are worth only $42.46. The farm lands of 
- Ohio, with only 40 per cent. of her people engaged in agriculture. 
are worth $46 per acre, while in Kentucky, separated only by the 


Ohio, but with 62 per cent. engaged in agriculture, they are worth 


only $14 per acre. The rugged land of Pennsylvania, with 21 per 
cent. of her people engaged in agriculture, is worth $50 per acre, 
while in Virginia, where 51 per cent. are engaged in agriculture, 
_ they are valued at only $11 anacre. By the census of 1880 in the six 
States of North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mis- 
 sissippi, and Arkansas 77 per’ cent. of the people were engaged in 
agriculture and only 5 per cent. in manufactures, and the average 
_ value of the farm lands in these six States was only $5.18 per acre. 


It is an astounding fact derived from the same census that the 


; value of the 200,000,000 acres of farm lands in the eleven States compos 


ing the late Confederacy are not equal to the 26,000,000 acres of farm 


lands in the States of New York and New Jersey. I beg to assure 
_ the’gentlemen of the South that I have drawn this contrast in no 
- invidious spirit, but only in confirmation of the fact that,the develop- 
ment of manufactures tends to enhance the value of agricultural 
lands. It seems to me, however, that there is a lesson to be drawn 


from this of inestimable value to you. The South needs this develop- 


ment. Protection has brought it to the North—it will bring it to 
you. [Appiause.] You have but to accept it and it will bring to you 
an era of unexampled prosperity. It will open and develop your 
- mines, explore your forests, light the fires of your furnaces, build 
_ your factories, construct your railways, invite capital to investment, 
- give employment to your labor, plant cities in your waste places, and 


lead your people into the highway of industrial progress. [Applause. ] 


- You have already entered thereon. During the last ninety days 


~ $36,000,000 of capital have gone into your manufacturing industries. 
In this I rejoice. There is not an industry in the South the develop- 


ment of which would redound to her glory that I would not as 


2 
“= 


jealously guard as though it were the industry of Michigan, | 


Be) a Pe hk a o. bad te Re None Eo Opp eens 6 - eae See 
‘ é am 2 aay” RY esd pe 


194 JULIUS C. BURROWS. 


believe in protection not for my State alone but for my country. 
[Applause.] I believe in American industries, American capital, 
American labor, against the whole world. 

The chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means expresses 
the hope that this measure will pass. He is not alone in this desire. 
There is not a member of the Cobden Club or a free-trader in the — 
United States who is not in {sympathy with him. More than this, — 
free-trade England stands on tip-toe of expectation and screams with 
delight. Listen to the voice of her exultation ! 


[London Times. | 
They are no doubt right in believing that, whatever may be said of 
preserving the essence of the protective system and of ignoring free trade, 
the tariff cannot be reduced to the strict proportions of a revenue correspond- — 
- ing to the limited and diminishing necessities of the Federal Government 
without admitting a great flood of foreign competition. if 


[London Saturday Review. | 


President Cleveland has devoted himself entirely to the tariff. It is 
impossible to recast this without touching directly the pockets of every ~ 
citizen of the United States and indirectly influencing the commercial — 
interests of the world. : 

[London Spectator. ] 
The message has struck a blow at American protection. 


[The Statist. ] 

There is hardly a single industry in the United States that is not interested 
- in maintaining protective duties. x 
[London Post. ] a 

We shall be much mistaken if the effect of this state communication will 
not be to strengthen considerably the case of free-traders in all parts of the — 
world. It will be regarded as a step in the right direction by all who believe © 
in the soundness of free-trade principles. . 


[London Standard. ] 
Free trade becomes at once a living issue. § 
[London Daily News. ] 


The stone now set rolling will not stop until it has broken the idol of 


protection in pieces. 
[Glasgow Herald. ] 


This reads like an extract from some old speech of Mr. Pright’s. 
[People’s Journal, Dundee. | 


The change in the American fiscal policy will be beneficial to this coun- — 
try, and the prospect of it has diffused fresh hope aan be the business 
circles in the city, iz 


~~_— 


tks: “8 ant oe Silat aaah i a +X Saige 


[Haddingtonshire Courier, Scotland. ] 
We may look to an impetus being given to our home trade that will go far 


F to make up for the depression of late years. 


(‘The Scotchman. | 
The free importation of iron, coal, and wool would be a great boon to 


_ British producers. 


- 


‘(London Times. ] 
It is to the new world that the Cobden Club is chiefly looking as the most 


; likely sphere for its vigorous foreign policy. It has done what it can in Eu- 
rope, and it is now turning its eyes westward and bracing itself for the 
struggle which is to come. It cannot rest while the United States are unsub- 


~ dued. 
: I hope this bill will not pass. [Loud applause on the Repub- . 


lican side.] It ought not to pass. 


Let me warn you, gentlemen of the South, that this measure 


bodes no good to you. It will arrest the investment of capital in 


your midst and bring your industries to a stand-still. There is no 


_ portion of our country where this measure should meet with a more 
; united and determined opposition than in the South. Untoward 
circumstances have heretofore retarded her material progress, but 
: the way is now open for her to march unimpeded to a splendid 
industrial future. The advance is already sounded. He who does 
- not respond to its inspiring summons will soon find himself without 
_aparty and without a following. I rejoice that there is a new South, 
a new industrial South, born of the throes of war, but full of hope 
and full of courage. [Applause.] She stands to-day with uplifted 
brow facing the dawn of a mighty future. Her loins are girt for a 
new race. With unfettered hands she smites the earth, and foun- 
tains of unmeasured wealth gush forth. Beneath her feet she feels 
the stir of a marvelous life. Her pathway is already illumined 
_ with the light of blazing furnaces. Her heavens are aglow with the 
break of anew day. All hail its on-coming ! 


‘« Aid its dawning tongue and pen, 
Aid it, hopes of honest men, 
Aid it, paper; aid it, type; 
Aid it, for the hour is ripe, 
And our earnest must not slacken into play; 
Men of thought and men of action clear the way.” 


And when the sun shall reach the zenith of that glorious day, the 


: North and the South cemented in the indissoluble bonds of commer- 


a 


cial and fraternal unity will stand together under the banner of 
_ protection to American industries and American labor, and march to 
Bee ndcr industrial triumphs. [Great applause. ] 


- 


Fas 


“Julius ©. Burrows. = = =—S«105 


HON. WILLIAM L. SCOTT, 
OF PENNSYLVANIA. 


(Democratic Side.) 


The bill before the House opens the whole field of tariff discus- 
sion, and it is avast one. Principles settled by the experience of 
mankind and accepted elsewhere as axioms of science appear to be 
considered open questions here. So rapid and tremendous are the 
changes in all the conditions of business, arising from the successive 
occupations of fresh soils and the unheard-of development of new 
industries, together with the enormous increase of population, that — 
before accepted principles can be applied to a given situation the — 
situation itself has changed; and your demagogue, with his mouth 
full of catch-words, insists that your science, though it be ever so 
true a science, can furnish no solution of a problem or an aggrega- — 
tion of problems which never arose before. I do not agree with the — 
demagogue. . 

I hold with the statesmen, that political economy is a science; — 
that the true principles of taxation are as definitely ascertained as — 
are any truths not susceptible of mathematical demonstration, and _ 
that their application in any country or to any condition will pro-— 
duce approximately the same results. Shall the United States, with 
their mighty bound of nature and giant industries, shrink from — 
the struggle for possession of the world’s markets? Shall we, the 
teeming Republic of the great West, 60,000,000 strong, with inven- 
tive genius keener, with labor more skilled, than any other people ~ 
on the globe, decline to compete for supremacy in the marts of 
mankind, and continue forever to trade among ourselves, under the 
insane delusion that we are growing rich by the process ? | 

Our friends, the enemy, say, ‘‘ Yes; let us build a Chinese wall 
around this young and vigorous people, whose eager enterprise al- 
ready chafes under the bounds of nature, and if we cannot make it — 
wholly impervious let us make it as nearly so as we can. Let us, if 
we cannot go clear back to the barbarism of China a thousand years — 

ie 196 . 


‘ WILLIAM L. SCOTT. 197 


ago, go back at least to the feudal ages, when traffic in almost every 
important commodity was a monopoly farmed out by the sovereign, 
and industry and commerce were alternately restricted and plun- 
_ dered under the ‘tariff’ regulations of rulers extremely solicitous for 
_ the interests of the labor which thus furnished the pillage.” 
_ They are Bourbons, Bourbons all, and of the densest kind. Their 
faces are turned backward, not forward; they are looking through 
the dismal shades of the dead past, not through the glowing day 
3 of the living present. Instead of removing the barbarous artificial 
restraints imposed upon the natural energies of the mass of men by 
ignorance, rapacity, and tyranny for the benefit of the few, they 
deliberately propose to reimpose them, to re-enchain commerce, to 
-reshackle labor, and to confine the industries of sixty millions of 
_ natural traders by asystem, considering the time and the conditions, 
- far-more absurd than the Chinese wall. 
_ LT have said that this bill and the subject of tariff taxation which 
it necessarily brings before the House are a vast theme. A very 
small part of it only can be fairly discussed within the compass of 
an ordinary speech, and I have therefore deemed it proper to select 
for,,examination in detail several of the most important articles 
upon which existing duties are changed by the committee’s bill, 
using these as illustrative of the whole. But I wish here to say, a 
the most decisive language I can command, that every alteration of 
duty effected by this bill has been matured by the majority of the 
committee with the same equal, conscientious, deliberate, and pains- 
taking care. Nothing has been done in haste; nothing without the 
_ most exacting scrutiny. I have personally attended every one of 
: the meetings devoted to the consideration of the bill, with perhaps 
five exceptions, and every line and word has had from me the most 
minute attention I was able to bestow. The same, I am sure, can 
be said of every other member of the majority of the committee, 
_ The bill is framed in the interest of the people—of the whole people. 
; We intended in the first instance to stay the mounting surplus in 
the Treasury, threatening overwhelming and possibly immediate 
| disaster, even now vividly impending; and, second, to relieve, as 
; far as prudence would permit at this time, the overburdened indus- 
; tries of the country from excessive taxation, the proceeds of which 
_do not pass into the Treasury, but go dec to the support of 
‘grasping monopolies which are, for the most part, combined in 
utterly indefensible and atrociously oppressive trusts. If the bill 
does not measurably accomplish these purposes, it is because the 
‘majority of the Ways and Means Committee is incompetent to 
frame such a law, and of that the country will be the judge. 


ip ee ee oy 74. 


ses a 


Ne oh tithes 4 Oily alle pone Anam 


Sah oA Mme an Aaah pec a Bea 8 OAL tg Detainee Rig aE MUTE 5 cis tay ih nt RRS a re Oe 
‘ “ty x ISS MR eta DOESN ct eo ee aa el 
‘ ie re A ¢ J er) : 4 is + “f 
| Seas "aa ctats wear he Mh y . ; , x 
+ sf: é nd 4 
se i . 


198 WILLIAM L. SOOTT. | ; 


And this Bourbon, I use the word in no offensive sense, but — 
merely to designate the man who dwells in the political barbarisms — 
of the past and vainly resists the enlightened progress of the present © 
—has a theory all his own, almost as liberal as that of the China-— 
man in the time of Confucius, and quite as liberal as that of the — 
potentates of Northern Africa, who blackmailed commerce and called — 
it ‘‘tariff.” He says that no matter what this alleged science of — 
political economy may teach, no matter what may be the experience — 
of the rest of mankind, and seein of that obnoxious little island — 
which manages to dominate the trade of the world, everything must — 
necessarily be different here. Though freedom of exchange may | 
produce the most satisfactory results elsewhere, restriction is abso- ~ 
lutely essential here. Though elsewhere men thrive by buying cheap ~ 
and selling dear, it is the reverse here. But his most remarkable 
assumption is that the true way to advance the interests of the ~ 
industrial classes is to tax their earnings, not into the public Treas- — 
ury, but into the private pockets of a favored few, monopolizing © 
American markets under a protective tariff, and regulating both 4 
production and price, by that last, most effective, and most terrible — 
expedient in restraint of trade, the irrepressible trust. Now, I agree — 
with my semi-civilized friend, the Bourbon, that our situation is” 
radically different from that of any other people on earth. But the 
difference does not consist in any exemption from the laws of nature, 
of trade, or of finance, but in the character of our free institutions, — 
by the genius and theory of which the people are left at liberty each — 
man to pursue his own happiness; that is to say, whatever may be 
the object of his endeavor, in his own way, and without hinderance © 
by an intermeddling paternal government except where regulation — 
may be imperatively necessary for the safety of the whole. The 
illustrious Gallatin, for over fifty years a citizen of my own State, — 
the most enlightened financier who has appeared in all American — 
history, third in the great Republican triumvirate—Jefferson, Madi- — 
son, and Gallatin—Secretary of the Treasury eight years under 
Jefferson and four years under Madison, in that famous memorial of » 
1832, containing the ripened fruits of his vast experience and pro- — 
found reflection, said of the alleged protective system in general: 3 


Let it be recollected that the system is in itself an infraction of an essential — 
part of the liberty of the citizen. The necessity must be urgent and palpable : 
which authorizes any government to interfere in the private pursuits of indi- 
viduals to forbid them to do that which in itself is not criminal, and which 
every one would most certainly do if not forbidden. Every individual, in — 
every community, without exception, will purchase whatever he may want on 5 
the cheapest terms within his reach. The most enthusiastic restrichlonisty 4 


a ae NTE ae, ge Ee rere 


Ca ee ey : 
: * 
a 


\ 


jai - WiELAM L BCOrT. 


the manufacturer most clamorous for special OA ASG will each individually 
pursue the same course and prefer any foreign commodity or material to that 
of domestic origin if the first is cheaper and the law does not forbid him. 
All men ever have acted, and continue, under any system, to act on the same 
principle. It is impossible that they should universally act in that manner, 
_ unless it was evidently their interest so todo. The tariff system is founded 
upon the principle that what is true of all men individually is untrue when 
_applied to them collectively. We cannot consider the adherence of enlightened 
nations to regulations of that description but as the last relic of that system of 
general restrictions and monopolies which had its origin in barbarous times. 


oO 


‘If the corn laws are the most odious of those protecting monopolies, ft is 
_ because they enhance the price of that which is still more essentially necessary 


than sugar, salt, clothing, or fuel; and we may safely predict that their repeal 
will be the first result of an improved representation of the people. 


We sit here under a written Constitution, exercising only those 
powers which are expressly granted, and nowhere in that instru- 


‘ment do we find the power to tax for any but a public purpose, and 


_ even a tax for a public purpose must be uniform in operation. 


-. I quote the Constitution, as follows: 
Sno. 8. The Congress shall have power: 1. To lay and collect taxes, duties, 


_ imposts, and excises to pay the debts and provide for the common defense 
and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts, and excises 


shall be uniform throughout the United States. 


T hold: 
First. That we have no power to lay a tax which, by excluding 
“the article taxed, defeats the object of taxation, namely, revenue for 


the economical support of Government. 


Second. That we have no power to lay a tax which carries nothing 


to the Treasury, but which draws money from one man’s pockets to 
_ put it in the pockets of another. A tax with this avoved object is 
as manifestly unconstitutional as would be a law taking the life of 
one man because his existence was inconvenient to another man. 


Third, That we have no power out of moneys actually collected 


and in the Treasury to grant largesses, or to make gifts to any man 


or class of men, and still less can we by the use of the taxing power 2 


re P 


i 


4 constitutionally transfer the earnings of the many to the few. 


These are cardinal principles of the Democratic party. When 
Alexander Hamilton, in the administration of Washington, built up 
a business aristocracy as an important part of his projected govern- 
- ment of corruption and splendor, declared that Congress might 
- indirectly subsidize manufacturing industries at the expense of all 


i others, Mr. Jefferson answered that such a proposition involved the 
& subversion of our whole republican system; that it presented*® 


$002==—t*~*«<“<«*é‘aR A gc 


squarely the question whether we were ‘‘ to live under a limited or 
an unlimited government ;” whether we were to have a fixed consti- — 


tution or no constitution; whether the people were to be freemen, left 
tothe free enjoyment of their individual earnings, or tobe theslaves 


of rapacious monopolies, corrupting the legislature and combining 


to create and to support administrations in the interest of the — 
favored few as against the plundered mass. That question was de- — 


termined in 1800 by the American people in favor of Jefferson and 
the Constitution. It has never since been determined otherwise 
when nakedly presented; and it never will and never can be other 
wise determined until we are prepared to abandon our free insti- 
tutions forever. 


A CURIOUS AND DANGEROUS BILL. 


In our efforts to meet the situation which confronts us to-day, a 
dangerous surplns and a necessary reduction of revenue, I will not 
attempt to discuss whether we should make whisky and beer free as 
against the proposition to reduce the cost of the necessaries of life. 
A bill has been introduced by a member of this House, and referred 
to the committee, which provides a large reduction of internal taxes, 
and deals very curiously indeed with customs duties. At the time of 


its introduction the Republican press, though opposed to tariff re- — 
form, was loud in praise of it as a bill on which all could unite, not 
only gentlemen on the other side of the House, but gentlemen on this — 


side also, who were supposed to differ with the majority. I cannot 
believe these anticipations will be realized when this bill is under- 


stood, or that any Democrat on this floor could be brought to favor — 


any of its provisions. 


It is fair to presume that those who have inconsiderately ap- 
proved this remarkable bill did not understand its provisions. — 


Covering one hundred and twenty-seven pages, it is too voluminous 
to be analyzed without great labor. It is impossible in one short 
view to present a statement of its whole effect or the system on 
which it was constructed. But taking theiron and steel schedule as a 


fair index of the genius of the proposed bill, and the one with which : 
the member introducing it is supposed to be most familiar, one which ~ 


he would naturally desire to conform most nearly to the demands of 
his immediate constituents or advisers, and passing judgment on the 
whole from this, it is safe to say it is not in line with revenue reform; 
not in the interest of the consumer, nor the middleman, nor the 
manufacturer; in truth and in fact it increases the burdens on every 
avocation, every industry, the iron-worker as well as the farmer. 
Taking it item by item, we find this astounding result: That for 


WILLIAM L. SCOTS 201 


every dollar of reduction of duties in the iron schedule, $26 are added 
to the burdens of the public, already too onerous to be borne. In- 
. stead of reducing taxation, as advised by the Administration ; instead 
_. of checking the flow of the people’s money into a Treasury already 
dangerously full; instead of relieving a tax-ridden people clamorous 
- for relief; instead of following in line with the declarations of every 
public officer this Government has ever had, that when we were 
collecting more money than was needed taxes ought to be reduced,— 
this bill actually proposes to increase them. Taking the home con- 
sumption statement from the Bureau of Statistics, which gives the 
jmportations and rates of duty for 1887, it will be found that about 
a sixty-seven items are left’by this bill in the iron schedule with rates 
-_ unchanged; that upon about fifty-six items rates are reduced, and 
upon about forty items rates are increased. But an examination of 
the changes discloses the startling fact that the aggregate reductions 
amount to but $353,000, while the increase of duties on iron, ete., 
; _ proposed by the bill Aserepates over $9,000,000. It is not draws He 
the interest of the Southern farmer, for among other things raised 
. are cotton-ties, on which the planter is taxed $158,910 more than be- 
_ fore, beside the consequent tribute on those of domestic manufac- 
ture. It is not intended to benefit the Western and the Northern 
farmer, for fence-wire, rods, etc., by this bill are made to pay over a — 
million and a half more than under the present law. 
It is not devised to help the suffering consumers of tin-plate, 
whether it be canners of fruit, meat, fish, or vegetables, or the con- 
- gumers of canned goods, for they are taxed for the useless can and 
: the implements of cookery, and for the very roof over the kitchen, 
over $6,000,000 more than at present. The manufacturer of steel is 
4 no better off under the bill, for the duties on imported ingots, from 
- _ which he makes his product, are raised nearly half a million, while 
his rails are reduced to $14 per ton—a cut both ways. In short, this 
pill benefits nobody and injures everybody. It finds the duties on 
iron and steel on an average of about 40 per cent., and it raises them 
by 50 per cent. or to nearly 60 per cent.ad valorem. From whatever 
point you look at it, itis a mis-begotten, ill-shapen, portentous, un- 
justifiable monster, with no excuse for existence, and no purpose in 
its life but to obstruct the Democratic party and to delay the justice 
which the country demands. [Applause.] 


COLONIAL DUTIES. 


During this debate I have listened with a great deal of interest to 
gentlemen on the other side of the House, who have so glowingly re- 
_ ferred us to the fact that Washington, Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison, 


See NE Bee ee FNM ie a em AN Ge Sign Bent Maca ate NE at a ph: git al 9 oy oe park coe a a een ry 
~ 902 ~ WILILAM £. 800TT. a 


and their compeers were the fathers of protection in this country. 
The first duties upon imports established by the Colonial Govern- 
ment after our independence were substantially as follows: There 
were but few articles selected, namely, liquors, sugar, tea, coffee, 
cocoa, molasses, and pepper. Under the head of liquors, Madeira 
wine, at that period of our history the beverage of the rich, and 
Jamaica rum, consumed by the great masses of the people of that 
- day, covered the liquor schedule. Upon Madeira wine was imposed 
an import duty of twelve-ninetieths of a dollar per gallon; Jamaica 
rum, four-ninetieths of a dollar; Bohea tea, used by the wealthier 
classes, six-ninetieths of a dollar per pound; other teas, twenty-four 


ninetieths of a dollar, the latter being the heaviest tax imposed. 


Upon all other articles imported 5 per cent. of their value. 

After the Constitution of 1789 had been adopted, it was James 
Madison, of Virginia, who brought into the House of Representatives 
the first tariff bill, and who urged its pessage. He then read the im- 
port duties of 1783, added a clause or two on tonnage, and urged the 
committee to adopt it or at least to make it the basis of a temporary 
impost. The first proposition was that the mass of goods, wares, and 
merchandise coming in from foreign ports should be taxed 5 per 
cent, on their value; but in the list of articles on which special duties 
were to be laid, the bone of contention appeared to be on Jamaica 
rum. Two duties wereesuggested, one of 15 cents and one of 12 cents 
a gallon, which soon divided the Committee of the Whole. And 
before this question was settled the debate turned on the good and ill 
effects of low and high duties; but finally Jamaica rum was taxed at 
10 cents a gallon. 

When a duty of 8 cents per gallon was proposed on molasses, im- 
mediately every member from Massachusetts arose and protested. 
It was too much; the people would never bear it. They shouted that 
the capital engaged in the business of distilling rum in Massachusetts 
out of this molasses summed up half a million of dollars. Yet it was 
now proposed to destroy this great industry which contributed so 
much to the prosperity and welfare of the nation, and with such 
persuasive earnestness did they plead, that the Committee of the 
- Whole consented to lower the duty to 24 cents per gallon. Some 
articles were thrown out and some were taxed without discussion, 
but a few gave rise to sharp debates. The greater part of two days 
‘was spent wrangling over salt. The bill then under consideration 
was reported to the House, but wool, and tin in pigs and bars, were 
on the free-list, and in three weeks thereafter became a law by the 
approval of President Washington. Under the tariff of 1783 eight 
articles were specified subject to import duty. The number of arti- 


oi ou eed 
Bead laine 18 


, 


q 
B 


Se ee ad ek ee Pa ek PO a WR YE Ls ey cet TN Tae TNT Sank AM MM NP Os i AB 
lon 4 ar > “agit » let Oya, at ieee : fere ‘ 


WILLIAM L. SCOTT. : 903 


cies named and taxed under the tariff of 1789 did not exceed thirty- 
two, all others being covered by the 5 per cent. clause. It is this 


tariff of 1789, introduced by Madison, approved by Hamilton and 


Jefferson, the average import duties of which did not exceed 7} per 


cent., that the gentlemen on the other side of the House tell us to- 
day the fathers of the Republic inaugurated, as protectionists, 
namely, a tariff in which the duties averaged 74 per cent. ad valorem 
in 1789, with a bankrupt Government, which could not borrow a 
dollar, and to-day, one hundred years after, with $150,000,000 in 
the Treasury over our wants, the average duty. is 47.7 per cent. ad 
valorem, 

What was our policy in 1852 with other nations, when we believed 
in trading with the outside world? In March, 1852, the United 
States sent a fleet to compel the Japanese, a great nation numbering 
35,000,000 people, to open their ports to the commerce of the world, 
and the thing was done; and in 1858 a treaty of amity and com- 


__- merce was signed between the two nations. Regulation 7 of that 


: mags 


treaty provides for the following duties on imports into Japan: 


Class 1. All articles in this class shall be free. 

Class 2, A duty of 5 per cent. shall be paid on the following articles im. 
ported into Japan, namely, all building material, rigging, or repairing, or 
fitting out of ships, whaling gear of all kinds, provisions salted, bread and 
breadstuffs, living animals, coals, rice, steam machinery, zinc, lead, tin, and 
raw silk. vy 

Class 3. All intoxicating liquors, a duty of 35 per cent. 

Class 4. All other goods, 20 per cent. 


And now, should the Japanese station a fleet off San Francisco or 


‘New York to demand open, fair, and unrestricted trade with us, in 


the name'of civilization, what answer could we make to them that 


Sag they might not have made to us ? 


THE PURPOSE OF THE PRESENT BILL. 


The bill under consideration has not been framed entirely upon 
the principles I have stated. The imajority of the Committee on 
Ways and Means realize and appreciate the condition of affairs ex- 
isting in the country to-day; and however desirous they might be to 


- extend that full measure of relief to the wage-worker and the great 


agricultural classes of the country, to which they are so justly en-_ 


titled, invested capital has its claims upon them. They appreciate 


the fact that during the past twenty-five years, under the present 
system of protected industries, immense sums of money have been 
invested in the various manufacturing industries of the country, and 


re : 
re a 


PAO RE Re ME Soe ee ATS Se a a at Oe ae ae 
peas ee ae rn ce a - . * ee AEN 


: 


5 iy lia 


904 : WILLIAM L. SCOTT. 


that any bill which the committee might introduce should have du 
regard for the capital invested in such manufactures; that it wou 
be unwise for any great political party having the power todoso fo 
at once attempt to readjust the conditions of to-day, which woul . 
undoubtedly “cause serious loss to those who had invested their 
capital under a previous condition of affairs. Keeping these objecis 
in view, we sought, first, to relieve these manufacturing industries 
by placing on the free-list, as far as we possibly could, such articles 
as are essentially necessary to them to enable them to compete, not 
only in their home markets, but in the markets of the world. 
Secondly, in the revision and readjustment of the various schedules, 
under the existing tariff, to leave ample duties on all merchandise 
_ that could possibly be imported from abroad in competition with 
our home products, and to protect our home manufacturers and the 
labor employed by them; and, as the best evidence of our efforts in 
this direction, I can only compare the average rates of duties under 
the existing tariff with what they would be under this bill if it 
should become a law, namely, the average ad valorem duties on 
dutiable goods under the existing tariff of 47.7 per cent. ad valorem, 
and the average under the proposed bill of 40 per cent. ad valorem. 
This shows a reduction under the present bill equal to 7.7 per cent, 
ad valorem. | 

On the opposite page is given a tabulated comparison of the dif- 
ference between existing duties and those proposed under the bill 
now before the House. 


According to this schedule the proposed reduction of duties on 

ABN OVS Moya es a Woe Sais b Ts Seis led we oy wide bier Stent pe $53, 720,447.22 
And according to the estimate of Joseph F., Miller, Commis- 

sioner of Internal Revenue, the reductions of internal revenue 


under the proposed bill will be...........eee. tases sNe ee 24,455,607. 00 
CE TOW TOOUCHION OL fs a sm ca peice ere ce kicwk oa SRN IAS $78,176,054.22 _ 


Of the $53,720,447.22 reduction of duties on imports under the 
proposed bill, should it become a law, $22,189,505.48 are derived 
from articles placed upon the free-list, leaving the sum of $31,530,- 
941.74 as the gross reduction made or proposed by the committee, 
applicable to all our varied industries; and yet the majority of 
this House and of the committee are charged with being free- 
traders! | 

The estimated amount of money that will be in the Treasury of 
the United. States at the end of the present fiscal year, ending June 
80, 1888, over and above all liabilities of the Government due at that 


at et 
~ge Pe) es 


WILLIAM L. SCOTT. 


205. 


98°88 QI FS Co LEP OSL ES OF SST ‘eet ‘98 Z9'SE9‘SS8 ‘6ST TP ZOE SUG. NGG Ciise ie ce ee nee eee 
eeeeet ee se wees 84°28 8F'S0S‘68T se BS inc SO ey 8F°S0S*6ST ‘2% 68'80T‘618'62 gee els td Lodi Esha Ach dliedetich fh 4Sl]-90.17 T310., 
08’ SP 86°S9 PL 16 OSS‘ TS OF SSI ‘eel ‘98 PL LET S99°L11 GLBPOOCE OLE Fe f°" Ses Srenes cece cesses <> OTQVINDp. (4IO7, 
6° bE Gh’ bP 00°TPL'6L0°T £8°96L'C06'S €8'986 86°F POSSS TCR UD [Mahe ee a he SOP OU ey N 
61ST OF FS 06°99S°E CE Serr CB'S86 ET TO'868' 2 ooesceee ecertete st P8019 sieded SHOU Mt. 
18°68 66°89 06° 189‘088 ‘eT OL°T98°S86 OT 06 °BFP'9S8 68 £0: LEI SPP Sb Fee ee ge as ae CL BUOLOOM PUG [TOORAK SE 
10° FS 64° SE 6L°SS8'Bh0'S 89 FS6°S8I'F TPOTS 8269 CO'PIS PEP AL ee ee ““spoos xepy pus ‘eynt ‘duiey “¢ 
00° 0F 06'0S 62 019226 86'686 S96, 29°66S'S83'T GB'S8S' ESPs Teer ceesceeseess**SpO0S U09900 pus 109}0D “J 
C9 SP 68'S 00'Sar' TEs %6'06E‘08E'T 66°08 TLL‘ 89°296 See's eee cepa cet Domo bahar SO OLA Ode gD 
90°88 4g 18 OF COSTE 09°F90°0T 00'L9S°TS 00°TPP'9S See rere Ee UC MRLCD f oak eae UOC) Lod 
#9°&9 £0 °@ F6'280'866' IT ELST SECS Gh 29°T09°STS‘9¢ 4° OT L68°89 Bee ee ae oe is gee lea Lebo Oe, OR ro 
C2 6% 09 FE STL8G LP £6 °218'098 S1°S08'208. 99°899°688. *reveseccerecerser*"OIGMUSPOOM PUB POOM “CT 
61 SF GEG 69°SLP OSPF T OL'FL8°926'9 66°28 '99P'S PS'68L'SST'OT oe ee nian neath oareh teint te nea ERR ORE Soto 
13’ 6F 96°99 GL L8B'9S2'T bP'0GB8"E91'S 91801 ‘066'9 G8"L90 26P OF *cecocecvoees*"OIVMSSE[S PUG OIBMUCTIIVW “A 
Chee #868 8L'818'8L89 gL'ors‘ sel T$ TS"0aT ‘st0's$ ge'cee‘0s0's$ eer eT cE iterate BE Re UL OU 6 
“peqiurer soynp | “T[Iq pesodoid : : 
jo yunoury iepun sernnq BOE ont be 
*(o[QeINp) SeTRpetps 
— po eullysy *188T JO SuOT}eIA0d wy] 
eeecreeseeesaese QL LS SP'SES‘BST 2S 6ES0T'618 62 Re gee een inp kee nina © Ca etaNanstemmse seg gates.” © Soe sap aie © ve oom ean une Reaerer iy AIO SLID O OT epee Ole 
were e ee ew ee ene 09° 6% 8) PS0‘06E'S 26°286'906'8T PR ee sigh Waratah Ae GER CE otc Gece cole Ee es eT ee ae ae 
es eenteeseses E12 GL OSF662' 91S SP OST e19 19¢ se wmeecceseeegseses eoves eccoe sececee O46 sTeqoutr sTeormieyo dwoy 4[es POOM 
qUed Lad "4Uad Mad 
*pesodoig “‘queselg *‘sorqyng “SOnivVA 
5 *"4ST]-O91,7 
—Jepun | 


W9IOTVA PR OSBIOAV “£88T JO SuOTeII0dUT] 


“uounuapisuon wepun 1729 942 faq pesodoud suonnoripou 
pun sabunyo oy ynn Siem buysrme oy wopun spoob pawdus wodn 97991100 sagniyp ayy fo wosrumdUuos pun wonnnpdDnonry 


ag 


ar 
$ . 


SOY Yin, OME TS ee a a ae ar 
aoe, ; es yt se el 


206 WILLIAM L. SCOTT, | ae 


date, is $150,000,000. Since the Secretary of the Treasury has re- 
sumed the purchase of bonds this month (May) the amount offered 
and purchased daily will not equal even the surplus of the daily 
taxes collected from the people after paying therefrom the daily ex- 
penses of the Government. 

The bill now under consideration has been formed for the double 
purpose of reducing the surplus and relieving the country of need- 
less taxation. The changes made, the majority of the committee be- 
lieves, will accomplish these objects; but let it be clearly understood 
that the interests of labor have been steadily held in view at every 
stage of our proceedings, and we believe that this bill furnishes that 
protection to labor which our oponents profess to give, but to which 
their policy is directly opposed. The effect of this bill will be, not to 
reduce his wages, but to lessen to him the cost of the necessaries of 
life, and to decrease his dependence upon the employer. Extreme 
poverty and liberty never exist together. Starving men and women 
cannot be free. Dependent upon the employer for the opportunity 
of earning bread, and frequently for the roof over his head, the 
steadiness of his work dependent, not upon the law of supply and 
demand, but upon the will of the trust, the employé in protected 
industries becomes the personal and political slave of his employer. 
It is the condition of this class, who must necessarily be either a 
menace to liberty or its bulwark, that the committee has primarily | 
sought to better. Protection, so called, will add no penny to the 
wage-worker’s pay or give one day’s additional labor in the year, but 
it will rob him of an undue proportion of his earnings to purchase 
the necessaries of life and keep him a trembling dependent, since the 
recent history of this country shows that the tendency of the pro- 
tected industries is toward combination in the form of trusts, undez 
which production is arbitrarily suspended, raising prices to the con- 
sumer and throwing the workman out of his job. Monopoly more | 
terrible, more dangerous to the liberties of a country, more oppres: 
sive to the laborer, cannot be imagined. 

This aristocracy, soulless and remorseless, is totally unlike that 
which exists abroad under the patents of the sovereign. The mem- 
bers of the latter draw their stated incomes from fixed sources and 
redistribute them among the people in the expenses of their living. 
But the members of our plutocracy, the plutocracy of subsidy, the 
monopolizers of American markets, are continually changing, by the 
operation of their own will, the objects and the volume of the taxa- 
tion which they levy upon the public, and the proceeds go to swell 
the fortunes of adventurers, which, when combined together, threaten 


Ee Pe isla sete) cork cg De castes AS Ds ahin stad sat oe os cei ae 


the pulitical bated ne of the public. Their exactions are limited 
only by their desire to take or by the ability of the masses to pay. 


THE FARMING CLASS. 


“in my opinion upon no class of our people do the present fiscal 
burdens of our country bear so heavily as upon the farming class, - 
It is not in the power of the Government, by any policy that can be 
adopted, to protect the farmer in what he raises and has to sell; but 
the Government can impoverish and virtually pauperize him and his 
family by not only imposing a high duty upon everything he con- 
_ sumes, which is or may be imported, but also by prohibitory duties _ 
~ upon commodities made in this country and necessary to his com- 
_ fort, which place it in the power of the home manufacturer, by com- 
binations and trusts, to charge what he pleases for his wares. What 
a mockery of protection thefRepublican tariff of 1883 is for the farmer! 
- Ina speech made by the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Burrows], 
_ referring to the advantages that the protection theory gave the 
- farmer, he used the following language: 


Among the advantages conferred upon the farmer by our protective tariff, 
is that derived from a direct protection to the products of his farm and the in- 
 dustries incident thereto, as shown by the following table: 


: Referring to the duties upon farm products under the existing 
_tariff:) Beef and. pork, 1 cent per pound; hams and bacon, 2 cents 
per pound; butter, 4 cents per pound; lard, 2 cents per pound; 


i cheese, 4 cents per pound; wheat, 20 cents per bushel; oats, 10 cents 


per bushel; corn, 10 cents per bushel; rye, 15 cents per bushel; live 


animals, 20 per cent. ad valorem; wheat flour, 20 per cent. ad 


valorem; corn-meal, 10 cents per bushel. 
I claim that not an article named in the foregoing schedule 
- would be imported into this country in competition with the American 
farmer, if they were all upon the free-list, with the exception of 
wheat, which could only come from Canada, and if every bushel of 
- wheat raised in Canada should be sold in the United States it would 
not affect the price of the American wheat one-tenth of 1 cent 
per bushel [applause], but the country would be the gainer if it 
were sold here, so far, at least, as the cost of transportation and 
commissions for storage and selling accrued to our railroads and. 
commission men. The home price of our wheat, corn, beef, pork, 
butter, lard, and cheese, and of all the products of the farm produced 
in excess of home consumption, and which have to be exported to 
Europe to find a market, is determined by the pricejof the commod- 


nae WILLIAM TL. scorn. ee POUT 


em Bes Peay ee Te ea Ae ee 


908 Lia sb: BcoPn 


ity in the markets of the world, plus the cost of tr ansportation. 
This is beyond controversy. 

I will also avail myself of a portion of the tables submitted in the 
speech of the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Burrows] in relation to 
the farm products of this country, and the quantities earn for 
the fiscal year of 1886-87, as follows: 


Production. Exportation. 
Products. 
Farm value. | Export value. | Farm value. |Per cent. 
Breadstufts: 
ONES cross wre bine nisin oer awratsla es $610,311,000 $20,052,704 $11,790,046 1.9 
WHORES iee eines sabe meeleiires 314,226,020 142,656,563 87,668,833 27.9 
MCRL Seti ge ce ke tie ed sem gie(e at 6 748,000,000 78,152,731 62,522,185 8.4 
Pee Ee 1 biogas 
REECON saa igs Wh vwedc cratmtesnseines 192,000,000 1,983,698 1,487,773 8 
aS) Gets PARES BA Eo gt I 32,000,000 7,594,633 6,455,438 aed 


Che 
Textile Tanrca: Gottol < o.. 257,295,327 206,222,057 177,895,501 


Why the tariff of 1883 did not contain a duty upon the importa- 
tion of cotton into this country I do not understand; for, most 
assuredly, if the duties provided for under the tariff of 1883 gave 
protection to the products of the Northern farmer, the same theory 
ought to have given it to the cotton-planter of the South; at least it 
would be just as consistent, practically applied, when we consider 
the exportations of the farm products of the whole country. 

If the products of our farms could have been sold at home for 
the one thirty-second part of 1 cent more than the export price, not 
one pound would have gone abroad; and every pound consumed at 
home would have been exported if it had commanded abroad one- 
half of 1 per cent. in value more than the home price; for the home 
price is governed by the price the surplus exported will command in 
the foreign markets. One of the strong arguments that the protec- 
tionist makes to the farmer is the home market that protection is 
alleged to insure for his produce. It isa fallacy and a fraud, and 
intelligent farmers will not be longer deceived by it. 

Let us suppose a case in my own State: Let us take, say, the - 
Edgar Thomson Steel Works, located at Braddock, on the Pennsy]l- 
vania Railroad, 10 miles east from Pittsburgh and 478 miles from 
Chicago, employing a large number of men. Contiguous to these 
works lives an industrious farmer with a hundred acres of land. 
His products consist of wheat, corn, oats, hay, hogs, and cattle. 
His proximity to these extensive works, where his surplus produce 
can be delivered in an hour, and where thousands of hungry 
mouths are ready to consume it, surely gives him an advantageous 


Ta eS * 1 Lie hers cae pee ORE A ie i OT EE os a) TE I scgnk oa Sts rise a wr CRAs eae ee fee eee re, a a. Ee eel te 
Ys eS Be Ae, Ses ear 4 ? er Ke ‘tna. oa ce wr <" oe 
a ‘ f et 2 5 


} 
, 

: 

4 
By 
j 


sf 


é 


= 


: 
: 
“. 
3 


ot 
ieee 


WILLIAM L. acorn. ad 909 


market, according to the protectionist’s theory. But let us see, let 
us take one of the products of the farm as an example of the others, 
for they all come under the same law of supply and demand and 
price. The man in the iron works cannot eat wheat; it must first 
be reduced to flour, so the farmer takes a load of 33} bushels of 
wheat, just 1 ton, to the miller, who is also on the railroad and near 
the steel works. 

Now, let us see what controls the miller in making a price to the 
farmer: first, self-interest, to purchase it as cheap as he can; second, 
to buy the fatiner’s wheat at a price which after being ground into 
flour will enable him to sell it to the mill-men in competition with 
flour sold by the grocery-man at the corner, which has been manu- 
factured at St. Paul or Minneapolis, Minnesota, leaving him (the 
miller) a margin of profit for grinding and his labor. Surely the — 
miller cannot pay the farmer any more for his wheat because it was 
raised on land adjoining the steel works; he can only pay what he 
would pay for the same quality of wheat in the Chicago market, plus 
the cost of: transportation to his mill. The miller explains the situa- 
tion to the farmer and gets his wheat for that price, or probably less, 


_ because the farmer’s market is restricted practically to the local mill. 


But where does Chicago wheat come from? Where is it grown and 
what law of values determines its selling price? It comes from the 
great regions of the Northwest; is grown upon the rich and fertile 
prairies of that section, upon land that can be had almost for the 
asking, or at most at a cost of from $3 to $15 per acre, upon land re- 


- quiring no barnyard to make a crop, and where the straw is burned 
‘in the fields as the easiest and cheapest way of getting rid of it. The 


price in the Chicago market is determined day by day, if there is 
not a “corner” in wheat, by the price at Mark Lane, London. 

The farmer at Braddock, after selling his wheat, returns to his 
home and family. He had bought his farm ata cost of $100 per 
acre, made a payment in cash upon it, from the savings of years of 
toil and labor, secured the deferred payments by a mortgage, hop- 
ing that by his industry and labor upon his farm and its favorable 
location he would make money enough to meet the interest and pay 


off his mortgage at maturity. He has sold his wheat at 90 cents per 


bushel, grown upon land which cost him $100 per acre, sown and 


harvested this wheat by labor for which he had to pay from $15 to 


$18 per month and board, and after the taxes upon the land. and his 
help are paid, and other debts connected with the raising of his crop 
are settled, he finds that both ends will not meet; that the price he 
has received for his wheat will not cover cost of production. 
Discouraged, but not disheartened, the farmer arises the next 


ae Vibe Shs. apa ame Neco ke es “da Alaa a er A eee Pe 


PILLIAW L. "ROOD . 


morning before the sun is up; hitches up his team and drives to 


town. He needs an iron or steel beam for some purpose on his 


farm, and goes to the steel mill to buy it; and upon asking the price 
is told that he can have it for 3.3 cents per pound, or at the rate of 
$66 per ton; and he is further informed that 3.3 cents per pound for 
_ steel beams is the uniform price at all the steel mills in the United 
States. Now, the farmer protests that 3.3 cents per pound for steel 
beams appears to him to be an exorbitant price; that his boy works 
in the steel mill, in the beam department, and that in figuring over 
the cost of making steel beams last night with his boy they could 
» not make them out to cost more than $29 or $30 per ton at the mill; 
that $66 per ton gave the steel works a profit of $36 per ton; and 
that he thought something must be wrong; what it was he did not 
just understand, but yesterday he brought into town 33} bushels of 
wheat, just one ton, and he could only get 90 cents per bushel for it, 
or 14 cents per pound, the equivalent of $30 per ton, and that this 
price did not pay him the cost of raising it; in fact, he lost money 
_ on it instead of making $36 per ton profit, as the steel works did on 
the beams, to meet the interest and pay the mortgage on his farm; 
that he could not understand why he should: be obliged to raise and 


sell 73 bushels of wheat, or over two tons, to enable him to purchase — 


one ton of steel beams, costing less than $30 per ton to produce and 
make. The answer of the steel-man was, that this condition of 
affairs all grew out of the pauper labor of Europe, and the necessity 
of protecting home labor, and to make a home market for the farm- 
er’s wheat, oats, corn, cattle, and hogs. The farmer being unable to 
refute this unanswerable argument, paid 3.3 cents per pound for his 
beam and departed a wiser man. In the evening the son returned, 
and with the father began to discuss the transactions of the last two 
days, endeavoring to ascertain why the farmer’s wheat would only 
command 14 cents per pound at the steel works, while the farmer 
had to pay 3.3 cents per pound for his steel beams. The farmer 
feared he had made a fatal mistake when he bought the farm; but 
he had been influenced in the purchase by a speech he had. heard in 
the fall of 1884 delivered by a very distinguished statesman, one Mr. 
Kelley, at the opera house in Braddock, in which that gentleman 
ably set forth the advantages of protection to home labor, and elo- 
quently dwelt on the home market it would create for the products 
of the farm, while enhancing the wages of the mill-hands. But the 
son could not see the advantage of Mr. Kelley’s kind of protection, 
either to himself, the mill-hand, or his father, the farmer. The 
price of the latter’s product in the home market being regulated by 
the price in Mark Lane, London, he was of course trading in an open 


WILLIAM L. SOOTT. 211 


market, and took nothing whatever by the so-called protection. As 
to his own wages in the mill, if he got any share of the tariff subsidy _ 
in the form of wages, it was so small as to be inappreciable and to 
count for practically nothing as against the prices he was made to 
pay for the ‘‘ tariffed” necessaries of life; but considering the em- | 
ployer’s share, and the necessities of a ‘‘ protected” employer’s life, 
he was not so surprised that the ‘‘ boss,” as alleged in the news- 


papers, could rent Cluny Castle, in Inverness-shire, Scotland, to 


spend his summers in; and as he believed that the net profits ot 
Carnegie Brothers on the two items of steel rails and steel beams 
alone, throwing out of account all other items of their production, 
were, on 30,000 tons of steel beams, $1,000,000, and on 192,998 tons of — 
steel rails, at $10 per ton, $1,929,980, or a total profit on these two 
items alone of nearly $3,000,000, the son, with an eye to facts and 
figures, declared his extreme amazement at the proposition of Car- 


negie Brothers to reduce wages 10 per cent., for the wage-workers of 


that establishment thought they might decently leave this pitiful 
percentage in the hands of that labor in whose name and for whose 
alleged benefit they receive the enormous bounty extorted from the 
consumers of the United States upon those two capital articles; 4nd 
that while the employés not only thought they were justly entitled 


to this 10 per cent., they were yet fighting for a principle dearer to 


them than mere dollars and cents. It was a principle involving not 
only the great economic problem of this age, but of past ages, and 
must be the great problem of the future—a fair division between 
labor and capital; and if the wage-worker at Carnegie Brothers’ 
works could be forced into subjugation by Pinkerton special detec- 
tives, their just rights denied them, and the imported pauper labor 
of Europe could be utilized as a means for the subversion of their 


rights, he could see very little hope in the future for the wage 


-worker in this country. 


IRON AND STEEL, AND THE EDGAR THOMSON STEEL WORKS. 


I propose, if I can, to prove that the boy’s conclusions in regard 
to his own wages are correct. In 1886 Hon. Daniel Manning, then — 
Secretary of the Treasury, issued circulars to the various manufac- — 
turing industries of the country, asking them for certain information — 
in regard to the cost of manufacturing, including labor and material, _ 
the object of the circular being to gather together certain data to lay 
before Congress in connection with a revision of the tariff. Among 
others to whom this circular was sent was the ‘‘ American Iron and _ 
Steel Association,” with offices at Philadelphia—an association repre- _ 
senting, I may say, the entire iron and steel industry of this country. 


ee a sts Bo Ry 1 og SE Ue ae Oa Le a Se te ee ee ae te OC) 4 
, - rs 4 , 4 a . a ee 
: : : - 
- * 


O12 WILLIAM L. SCOTT. 


This association sent out to the various manufacturing industries 
that formed the association a circular letter, asking that the infor- 
mation desired by the Secretary of the Treasury should be reported 
to them, and that they would forward it tothe Department. Among 
the replies received by the association was the following communica- 
tion from Thomas M. Carnegie, chairman of Carnegie Brothers & Co., 
Limited, Pittsburgh, Pa.: , 

Notwithstanding your able argument in favor of reporting details of cost 
_ of production of iron and steel, as requested by the Secretary of the Treasury, 
and in a less objectionable form by yourself, I am of the opinion that our in- 
terest would not be served by making such returns as youindicate. (See page 
_ 378, Report of the Secretary of the Treasury on revision of the tariff, with ac- 
companying documents, 1886.) 

I am prepared to supply a portion of the information desired by 
the Department, and which Carnegie Brothers & Co., Limited, de- 

clined to give, taken from their own books. 

I hold in my hand a copy of a contract, executed under seal, 
-which I saw copied from the original myself, of the schedule of 
wages as awarded by the board of arbitration, selected by the Knights 
of Labor and the Edgar Thomson Steel Works, fixing the wages of 
the employés of that company in the steel-mill department for the 
year 1887: and from this contract I submit a statement based upon 
the absolute amount of money paid to these employés in connection 
with the steel-rail department of that company. They are not theo- 
retical figures; they are the absolute results in dollars and cents, and 
fully and clearly set forth the earnings of the wage-workers working 
- in that company. 

STEEL RAILS, 

Under the terms and conditions of this contract the following is 
the cost of manufacturing a ton of steel rails, of 2,240 pounds, at the 
Edgar Thomson Steel Works, located near Pittsburgh, Pa., during 
_ the year 1887, one of the largest establishments of the kind in the 
 Wnited States: 

_ Market price of 1 ton of No. 1 Bessemer pig-iron at the mill.......... $18.00 


MET Ce vIRTe SAUIC, PEI LOD. soca Agaisiele se tei apie aus cod eo ae sea eee 1.50 
Blooming, per ton... 2... eee ees cece cee cece eee w ose. ole Ss aes Oates 72 
Pia PeMDM CME” LOT. so 5-5. « 9. 5:0 05s bo eiensse ab 6 coth as a am bane 4 we bold ee 1.87 
14 tons Connellsville coke, average $1.35 per ton..........sseseeceeee 1.62 
23.71 
Add for net loss.on material, first to last, 18 per cent.............00-0- 3.08 
SOM eho a cans Cy een nj ne 0.8 w 9507s WP akg Nivaeie bbe eebE lp bie cage ee 26,79 
Divided as follows ; 
NAM OP re Fre! Beis eA UCD dpe ale wicks WG Rle wie ba os MOEN wr oP. ane $4.09 
Material and waste. ......2...ceseeoes Sai eh eae aoe rey aan 22.70 
‘ —— 26.79 


WITTTAn 2 SOOT 913 


The percentage of labor ates to the cost of production i is 15.26 per 
cent. The percentage of labor cost to the average selling price of steel 


- rails—namely, selling price of rails, $37.50; labor, per ton, $4.09— 


is 10.9 per cent. The present rate of $17 per ‘ton duty on steel rails is 
equal, under the present tariff, to an ad valorem duty of 85 per cent. 


STEEL BEAMS OR STRUCTURAL IRON. 


The principal difference in cost of making aton of beams or — 
structural steel and a ton of steel rails is about/30 per cent. additional 
in the cost of labor: 


Polar e. pee, Sa i Cae) Gad ake Pag era aM 28.02 


The value of steel beams imported into the United States in 1887 
at foreign ports of shipment was 1.2 cents per pound, or $26.88 per 
ton, and the duty upon the same under the present tariff is 1} cents 
per pound, or the equivalent of $28.88 per ton, or 102.75 per cent. ad 
valorem. 

These estimates of cost in the United States represent net cost 


without profit or allowance for interest on or depreciation of plant, 


or for fuel for steam power, or Spiegeleisen, or manganese, the cost 
of steam power and Spiegeleisen adding very little to the cost per ton. 
The cost of labor paid for the manufacture of a ton of steel beams, 
based upon the cost of production per ton,—namely, labor $5.33, cost 
$28.02,—is 19 per cent. The percentage labor received based on the 
selling price of a ton of steel beams, namely, $5.33 for labor and $66 


- per ton selling price, is 8.7 per cent. 


The total output of steel rails, blooms, ingots, and beams at these 
works during the year 1887 was as follows: 


Tons of 2,240 pounds. 
SPRRERSIMNEIS, Shae RIO Cees tie Vee cea toe once bite anit arne atereaads \ ggiate 192,998 


BOOMS trek Sesh Ose Ste kaos betes 8 Pig tn CEC tae te eka as at ka os 220,285 
Ingots...... RE aay Ook at hts Cee SL peau hoe aie ae ae i Be 241,874. 
RITE PH NOATIG FOStLIIAEONL).. Se Fe lena tale do. pe ares ace was wa eee ees By eo 4, OO; 000 


The number of men employed in producing the above, classed as _ 
skilled labor, and the actual wages paid them per day, as awarded 
by the board of arbitration of the Knights of Labor and accepted by 
the managers for the year 1887, were as follows: 


CONVERTING DEPARTMENT, 


Seventy-six men working on turns of eight hours, requiring for 
twenty-four hours 228 men: Gross amount paid 76 men per turn, 


* 


~) TNS 3 hs Ne “hives 4 a ath ata 


ON ee eT ey EEN EE ena OR AURA OAC Ph ee eee We pe a oe RP ee ei 
O14 | WILLIAM L scorn, ee 


under contract, $230.02; average daily wages of each man in the 
converting department, $3.02. 


BLOOMING DEPARTMENT, 


Twenty-seven men working on turns of eight hours, requiring for 
twenty-four hours 81 men: Gross amount paid 27 men per turn, 
under contract, $76.02; average daily wages of each man, $2.81}. 


RAIL DEPARTMENT. 


Yorty-two men working on turns of eight hours, requiring for the 
twenty-four hours 126 men: Gross amount paid 42 men per turn, 
under contract, $126.89; average daily wages of each man, $3.02, 


FINISHING DEPARTMENT. 


One hundred and nineteen men working on turns of twelve 
hours, requiring for the twenty-four hours 238 men: Gross amount 
paid 119 men for twelve hours, under contract, $230.01, average daily 
wages of each man, twelve hours, $1.93. 

Total amount of skilled labor employed, 673 men. Average daily 
wages paid 673 men, $2.58. 

The number of tons of steel rails produced per man at the Edgar 
Thomson Steel Works during the year 1887, the number of days em- 
ployed not being taken into consideration, was 286.77 tons per man 
per annum. 

As the total output of the entire force of men engaged in the 
Edgar Thomson Steel Works in 1887, in the converting, blooming, 
rail, and finishing departments, was: ingots, 241,874 tons; blooms, 
220,235 tons, assumed to be represented by the steel-rail product of 
the mill, namely, 192,998 tons, and as the total output of the steel 
rails in the United States, according to the official statements, was 
2,049,638 tons for the year 1887, this would, by inference, make the 
total number. of skilled employés engaged in this industry in the 
United States, during the year 1887, 7,147 men. 

Let us ascertain from these figures, if we can, what it costs the 

_ people of this country under the protectionist’s theory and the exist- 
“ing tariff of to-day for steel rails alone, to equalize what they claim 
to be the difference between labor and material i in England and labor 
and material in’the United States, and then-to ascertain, if we can, 
what proportion of this protection, claimed for the equalization of 
labor, labor receives. In producing a ton of steel rails, we started 
with the Bessemer pig-iron. The average price per ton of No. 1 
Bessemer pig-iron during 1887 did not vary materially from $18 per 
ton in Pittsburgh, and the average price for the same quality of iron 


WILLIAM L, SOOTT. | 915 | 


in England during the same period was $12.50 per ton, or a difference 


of $5.50 per ton. 

As I have shown, the cost paid for the labor to produce a ton of 
steel rails at the Edgar Thomson Steel Works was $4.09, and allowing 
a difference of even 50 per cent. in labor between England and the 
United States, which is excessive, to protect. the wage-workers in 
this country engaged in the steel-rail factory against the so-called 
pauper labor of England, it would require $2. These two items of 
the difference in cost of pig-iron and the difference in labor would 
equal $7.50; and a duty on steel rails, therefore, of $7.50 per ton 
would cover every claim upon which the theory of protection is 
based. But it costs something to get a ton of steel rails from Liver- 
pool to our seacoast, and the average freight and insurance during 
the year 1887 from Liverpool to New York was about $2 per ton, 
which is the equivalent of so much more protection to the producer 
in this country, and this, if deducted from the $7.50, would still 


further reduce the necessary duty, even under their own theory, to 


$5.50 per ton. But let us be liberal with,them; let us call the freight 


- and insurance 50 cents per ton, and then a duty of $7 per ton, under 


their own claims and theories, would be ample. The present duty is 


_ $17 per ton, and, if Iam correct in my figures, $10 per ton in excess 


of what is absolutely necessary, as they claim, not only to protect | 
home labor, but to cover the difference in the cost of pig-iron. 
I have shown that the cost to produce a ton of steel rails at the 


Edgar Thomson Steel Works in 1887 was $26.79; and surely a profit 
_ of $5 per ton on the number of tons of steel rails produced in the — 
United States ought to satisfy the most avaricious manufacturer, 


and this would bring their selling price up to $31.79 per ton, just 
about the average price in the United States to-day, namely, $31.50 


~ to $32 per ton at the mill, and $5 per ton profit on the output of steel 


rails for 1887 would be the equivalent of $10,248,190 of profits divided 


between ten or twelve establishments engaged in this industry in 


this country. But the average price at which steel rails sold for in 
the United States during the year 1887 was $37.124 per ton, or $5.33 
in excess of the price to-day, or $10,924,570.54 additional profit on 
the output of 1887, or an aggregate profit of $21,171,760 to be divided 


between ten or twelve steel-rail mills in the United States; and Iam — 


satisfied that this is not very much out of the way. 
When we come to structural iron and steel beams, although the 


- output is much less than steel rails, yet the figures are more astound- 
ing. A fire-proof building cannot be erected in the country that 
- structural iron and steel are not a material part of its cost. It isa 


large part of the cost in the railway and highway bridges of the _ 


216 WILLIAM L. SCOTT. 


country. Its use not only adds to the durability of all structures, 
but in our large cities lessens the chances of conflagrations and 
reduces the rates of insurance. I have shown that the cost of a ton 
of structural steel produced at the Edgar Thomson Steel Works dur- 
ing the year 1887 was about $28.02. But let us call it $33. You 
cannot to-day buy a ton of steel beams for less than 3.3 cents per 
pound, or $66 per ton. . 

It is well known that the steel-beam industry of this country 
to-day is in a trust; and I have further shown that the average price 
of these steel beams imported into this country during the year 
1887, upon which duties were levied, was 1.2 cents per pound, or 
$26.88 per ton, and that the duty upon them under the existing 
tariff is 14 cents per pound, or $28.88 per ton, the duty exceeding 
the value of the imported article $2 per ton. The output of these 
steel beams at the Edgar Thomson Steel Works during the year 
1887 averaged about 100 tons per day, or 30,000 tons per annum, and 
the difference between the cost of its production, $33 per ton, and 
$66 per ton, the selling price, leaves a margin of $33 per ton, or 
$1,000,000 profit on this one product alone; and I ask this House 
and the country whether or not the Committee on Ways and Means 
is justified in reducing the duty on steel rails from $17 per ton to 
$11 per ton, and on steel beams from 14 cents per pound to six-tenths 
of 1 cent per pound, which leaves the duty on steel rails under the 
proposed bill equal to 55 per cent. ad valorem, in place of 85 per 
cent. ad valorem under the existing tariff, and on steel beams at 
444 per cent. ad valorem, in place of 102 per cent. under the present 
law? 

Mulhall, in his History of Prices, in referring to wages, page 127, 
says that the percentage of wages paid of the value of manufactures 
produced in the United States since 1850 was: In 1850, 23.3 per 
cent. ; in 1860, 21.2 per cent.; in 1870, 19 per cent.; and in 1880, 17.8 
per cent. ; and that the British operatives earn, as a rule, in wages 
from 30 per cent. to 33 per cent. of the value of the manufactures 
they produce, while in the United States the workman gets only 
17.8 per cent. On page 125 he states the advance in artisans’ wages 
in England and France between the years 1840 and 1880 was as fol- 


' lows: 
Occupation. France. England. 
Per cent. Per cent, 
BIGGIEBINEEDS tre ca ce ieee elcid 6 Gileielslsica be clesng omvateauh Carole 45 64 
IVERSON S hoo cant oi ats aoe o eipcana enews siah eoprece wie bi kia Makste's Marte bare oem ae 55 70 
AY DERCERS sera y ek wais Sis see RVC es a ule oke clala: ath in urate sieiatinei ce etaeh faneesl aioe 55 60 
PUMA OTS te) (eh Sle cue arteries unas Wiestoga webnl wvee outa hice Me ee 57 70 


WOCHOR, SDINTIOLS Wiican < Os Sec asc sciors eawere niberé ai ote wre pis scene mis 5 praises 42 48 


ian ia ne ROAR «yep omen rec PT ete Lae RN EO DRA ee ay ee Lae ch a ed 
eid SS TR me ee Soe iy aS 


WILLIAM L. SCOTT, ~ 217 


COST OF BEAMS IN OTHER MILLS. 


I also have before me a pamphlet entitled ‘‘The Edgar Thomson 


. Steel Works,” dated 1887. It is an authentic pamphlet, furnishing 


_ certain data, which could have only come from the proprietors of the 


company. I will only quote an abstract from the last page. 


To keep the works running, on an average daily output of 1,400 tons of 
iron and manganese and 800 tons of rails, requires the handling, by loading 
and unloading, of 7,920 gross tons of material daily, namely, 2,300 tons of iron 
ore, 1,450 tons of coke, 670 tons of limestone, 1,400 tons of pig-metal, 1,000 
tons of cinder, 800 tons of rails, 300 tons coal, sand, brick, molds, refracto- 
ries, etc., a greater tonnage for these works alone than the entire cotton-crop 
of the United States. 


If the proprietors of the Edgar Thomson Steel Works were in- 
dicted before a United States grand jury for obtaining money under 
false pretenses, namely, as parties to the tariff act of 1883, if this ad- 


mission would not convict them, then I am at loss to know what 


would. With an average output daily of 1,400 tons of pig-iron and 
800 tons of steel rails, their total consumption of coal is so insignifi- 


- \eant as to be included in the items of ‘‘ sand, brick, molds, refracto- 


says: 


me ee. eee ee 
ae Wwe + ora. 
’ — P 


ries, etc.,” at 300 tons total of these articles; and the number of tons 
of coke consumed, 1,450 tons, which, at the market price of to-day, 


figures $1.10, would make a total cost per day of $1,595, equal to a cost 
- for fuel of only 724 cents per ton on an output of 1,400 tons of pig-iron 


and 800 tons of steel rails, and in which estimate no allowance is 


made for natural gas. 


' Comparisons are always odious, but the latter part of this extract 


A greater tonnage for these works alone than the entire cotton crop of the 


_-United States. 


I will endeavor to make some approximate estimates and com- 
parisons, which this pamphlet has failed to provide. One of the mem- 
bers of the Edgar Thomson Steel Works, Limited, admitted to me 


within the past month, within 200 feet of where I now stand, that a 


statement made by myself in the fall of 1886 was correct, namely, 
that he drew out of the company as dividends in one year the sum 


of $1,500,000, the equivalent of $5,000 per day for three hundred days 


in the year, and this was but one member of the firm, with no state- 
ment of profits undivided. No intelligent business man will put the 
profits of this company at less than $5,000,000 in prosperous years, 


~ and we will allow them to employ 8,500 wage-workers. 
| wish distinctly to state here that I believe it to be the duty of 


sh gah Se ee Cnr abace tiie ict Gee A ak 


> 
Sek 


oa 


218 WILLIAM L, SCOTT. 


‘i every man to accumulate every dollar possible in fair and open com: 
petition with his fellow-men; and that the dollar so accumulated by 
his industry, energy, and economy is entitled to its due share of pro- 
tection by the Government without discrimination as between the 
rich and poor. I care not how many millions of dollars any man 
may thus accumulate; but what I protest against is that while 
the great masses of the people are weighed down in their struggle for 
existence the favored few are permitted to rob them, under the pre- 
tense of protection to home industry and home labor. [Applause.] 


COTTON. 


Let us find out if we can what the cotton-planter of the South 
is doing: 
The average price per pound for cotton in 1886, on the plantation, was 
Si-cents/on a bale of 500 pounds i. 05030 Fi. eila eee $42.50 
The most reliable estimates of cost of production gives labor 50 : 
per cent. of the selling price of cotton on the plantation, 
mame ly er PALO le & Gare ows aka ober Ges wean eee $21.25 
(As against only 8.7 per cent. of the selling price of a ton 
of steel beams which labor receives at the Edgar Thomson 
Steel Works.) 
Incidental cost to planter over labor Cost.........eese0. oes 0b os4) Ae 


Profit to planter per bale for interest on plantation and for supervision. . 15.00 - 


_ This sum, $15 per bale, on 6,500,000 bales, yield of 1886, would be 
$97,500,000. |The total plantation value of the cotton-crop of 1886 
was $269,989,812, equal to a gross return for each acre cultivated of 
$14.75. 

The Commissioner of Agriculture, in his report of 1886, page 417, 
‘says: 
: ‘The planters of the Southern States are selling the cheapest cotton in the 
world and buying jall supplies at enormous prices, a practice which only 
fertile lands, abundant crops, and persistent industry can save from bank- 
ruptcy. © 


PROTECTED AND UNPROTECTED INDUSTRIES. 


According to the pamphlet referred to in connection with the © 
Edgar Thomson Steel Works, they represent that their whole area 
of ground is 154 acres, and we will concede that they employ 7,500 
wage-workers—which they do not—in their various industries, — 
According to official returns of the Agricultural Department, there _ 

are now under cultivation in the production of cotton 18,000,000 


r “WILLIAM 1. NCome OO 


acres, and a fair estimate of the number of adults employed in cul- 
tivating these fields, allowing four bales to an adult, is 1,625,000 
wage-workers, and allowing each one to represent a family of five, 
it would give a total of 8,125,000 of our people dependent upon this 


industry for a support and a living. I have estimated the net profits 
_ Of the entire cotton-crop of 1886 at $97,500,000, which represents the ~ 
~ interest on the cost of the 18,000,000 acres of land and the super-. 


vision and other contingent expenses and liabilities to the planter. 
Assuming that my statement that the said company’s net profits 


in the most prosperous years are $5,000,000, I would be pleased to 
have some mathematician work out for me the relative comparative 


profits realized by the protected industries of the Edgar Thomson 
Steel Works, employing 7,500 men, with an estimated capital of 


- $20,000,000, occupying 154 acres of land and improvements on same, 


and the profits realized by the unprotected planters of the South, 
cultivating 18,000,000 acres of land, and employing 1,625,000 adults 


- in this industry, supporting 8,125,000 of our population. Yet, when 


the committee introduced this bill into the House and proposed to 


' put the cotton-ties in which this cotton had to be baled for exporta- 


tion on the free-list, the gentlemen on the other side of the House 
denounced it as a discrimination against home industries and the 


| theory of protection. 


. GRAIN REGIONS OF THE NORTH. 
When we turn from the cotton-fields of the South to the grain 


regions of the North, we find that the condition of the latter is no 
better than that of the former. I shall not attempt to go into any 
detailed discussion as to why this is so, but will simply call the 


be attention of the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Burrows], and sub- 
~ mit to him an interrogatory, which he need not reply to until he has 


had an opportunity of seeing and conversing with the farmers of his 


_ own State, when, undoubtedly, he can do so more intelligently than 


now. Recording to the agricultural returns from the State of 


Michigan for the year 1885, we find the following cereals were lapse 


- duced: 
Indian corn...... bushels. .30,706,000 | Barley.......... bushels. . 1,200,000 
BMG. ee was wiane « Coase: 81,261,000 | Buckwheat........ Gosnes, 433,000 
12 (ae rn A dor... 28 250°000:-| Potatoes...4 525070 &. do.....12,880,000 
EY ge eee GOsecs BE 1800004 1s ELS V ahs Slee ne oe 0d tons... 1,507,232 


We also find that it required 4,690,304 acres to grow them; that 


q the total value of the crops was 864, 445,697; and that the gross yield 


a 
Y 


_ per acre averaged $13.74; that under the census of 1880 the number 


y * 


% ae 


Sut aesbaDauraadessiacyd src 


i Hea Se 
a Kee UNIS aca ne ar ee 


Te Wee RAMS Nhs g 
rats LORS eee Be erat 
ge A Gh Se NBM, Weigh, lae 


Wienta 1 L. “scorn, 


= 


of persons in that State engaged in farming was 240,819: and] 


would ask the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Burrows], after he has 
ascertained from the farmers of his State what they realized in the 


way of profits from these cereals, to compare their percentage with 
the profits of the protected industries of the Edgar Thomson Steel 
Works, as illustrated in connection with the cotton-crop, and to give 
me his conclusions regarding the discrepancy. 


NATURAL GAS. 


And here, in immediate connection with this illustration, drawn 
from the Edgar Thomson Works, of the operations of a monopoly 
duty, swelling the profits of the manufacturer into most unreason- 
able and even appalling figures, whilst adding nothing to the wages 
of labor, either common or skilled, and at the same time restricting 
the market of the farmer for his produce, though simply pillaging 


him upon his purchases of implements and apparel, I beg to call the 


attention of this House, and of the country, to the new and natural 
force which is, in my opinion, destined to revolutionize, indeed has 
already in large degree revolutionized, some departments of 
American manufactures... I allude to natural gas. It is used at the 
Edgar Thomson Works; but it appears that the economy of its use 
has not as yet enabled the proprietors to reduce the price of their 
product, or to add anything to the wages paid. 

It is the cheapest and most effective fuel ever discovered or in- 
vented by man. The world cannot show its equal. The Almighty 
has placed it in apparently inexhaustible quantities in the very 


heart-center of our so-called protected industries; and the applica- ° 


tions of which it is capable are innumerable and unlimited. It 
needs not to be mined; it transports itself; it may be piped any- 
“where; it requires almost no labor to handle it, and it leaves no 
residuum or débris to be removed. It is the ideal fuel, and so 
hastens, cheapens, and improves the quality of production as to 
place ultimately every manufacturer within reach of its incalculable 
advantages beyond any possible competition of foreign rivalry. 
What then do the manufacturers, so fortunately situated, require to 


enable them to ‘‘take the start of this majestic world and bear the _ 


palm alone”? Nothing but free raw material, open markets around 
the globe, no unnecessary restrictions here or there, cheap food, 


cheap raiment, and cheap blankets. Western Pennsylvania, EKastern 
Ohio, and large areas besides, which are soon to be supplied with — 


this marvelous agent, would, if they understood their true interests, 


and in a brief time will, exchange the pitiful cry of more subsidies ‘a 


< 4 = ae 
s { ’ ; { n 


, ae PS 
Te wt ee oe 4 


Se. 
i 


ip De pi ett Nat aides) Lat oe aa a eae at ie ere 


WILLIAM L. SCOTT 997 


for the most thriving industries on earth, for a thundering demand 
for freedom of exchanges and cheap supplies. 


ACCUMULATED WEALTH OF THE UNITED STATES. 


The truth cannot be too often stated, nor falsehood too often | 
_ exposed. Gentlemen on the other side of the House have frequently © 
referred to our immense strides in the accumulation of wealth 
between 1850 and 1880, and this I admit; but they claim that pro- 
tection has done this in the building up of our manufacturing indus- 
_ tries. I will take their own figures, upon which they base this 
claim. I submit the following official table, which tells its own 
story: : , 
The wealth of the United States and its development from 1850 to 1880. 
[Compiled from the reports of the United States Census. ] 


True value of real estate and personal property. 


3 ; : 

Years, A = = 8 

Total. ae Distribution. Total. ge | Se 

i B Ber 

Ay Ay pu © 
‘3 righ ee ahes a ee syne i $171 69.61 
; anufactures........ 243,351 23 V4 
1850........ $7,135,780,228 | $308 |) Railroads. ..s.-.. 296260128 | 13) 4.15 
Al bthere...s 0; SLU) asasto3r168 | 101 | 18.77 
A Ppcuure OSTA StS Gey ue 254 49.39 
4 -|} Manufactures........ 5055, 715 82 6.25 
-1860........) 16,159,616,068 | 514 | 4 Railroads.....----... 1°134,452,909 | 36| 7.02 
MU Other ss esr eens 6,034,814,381 | 1921 37.34 
By. th Agriculture.......... Se ears 231 37.00 
Be aaa: Manufactures........ 694 5 7.04 
 -1870........ 24,054,814,806 | 624 |) pailroads............ 17632,980,616 | 42 6.79 
All othercc 11,827,300,041 | 3071 49.17 
<a ( Agriculture Rend ells 12, 104, (081,440 | 241 | 27.74 
ee ry Manufactures........ 2 90,272,606 56 6.39 
 1880........ - 48,642,000,000 | 870 | Ratroads Pie LN et: 4,112,367,175 82 9.42 
’ | Albother pen: 24,635,278,779 | 491} 56.45 

Increase during decade. 

ears. = 3 Pe ol 

Total. MS S Distribution. Total... ‘i 8 

o Bi 5 5 

= ey 4 Ay A 
a Agriculture ewite $3,013, 1 49,483 62. a $110 

5 Manufactures... ,610,364 ; 
1860 eer cess $9,023,835,840 126.46 $330 Railroads... oh a 838,192,781 282. 04 31 
All other......... 4,695,883,212 | 350.72 | 172 
. Agriculture J eete 919,478,084 1 1.52 26 
. Manufactures... 684,711,483 ic 20 
(1870........) 7,895,198,738) 48.86) 226 |) Railroads........ 498,527°%07 43.94 14 
ee AI others 2303 5,792,485,660 95.98 | 166 
“Se [ Agriculture sonal 8,204,114,448 36.00 ie 
anufactures ... 1,095.705,45 66 

1880........ 19,587,185,194) 81.43) 442 |) Roitroads........ 2'479.386.559 | 151.83] 56 
All other.....: -...) 12,807,978,738 | 108.80} 289 


c ANDO Tot SE ee Ua eee AE ace res is 


* font he eae ’ Sie hal Na Pr kde ok 
oceatge Tet SARA Ap ee eee < 


9099 WILLIAM L. SCOTT. 


The wealth of the United States and its development from 1850 to 1880— 
Continued. 


Increase since 1850. 


3 & 
Years, me of = = 
os o : ° : oD 
3) § Distribution. Total. 3) 4 
Total. “g “f i = 
epg Par oe a 
| papcultare <ENs saben os 4 oie 
anufactures.... 476,610,36 9. 
1860........ $9,023,835,840)126.46/ $330 |4 Railroads... 838°192'781 | 262.94 | BI 
{ All other......... 4,605,883,212 | 350.72] 172 
| Agriculture ...... caf coeaal Bei i 
Manufactures.... 1,161,321,801 ie 3 
1870........ 16,919,038,578/287.11) 545 14 Railroads... -. 1'336,720,488 | 451.20] 48 
(rAd POthGrs beeen. cs 10,488,868,872 | ~ 758.69 3838 
Agriculture...... 7,136,737, 860 143.66 199 
Manufactures.... 2,257,027 255 423 .26 63 
ASSO Rs. os. 36,506,219, 7'72)511.60) 1,019 Railroads. .....-. 3,816,107,047 | 1,288.09 107 
LAll other.........] 23,296,347,610 | 1,789.37 650 


Nores.—Gold being at a premium of 25 in 1870, the data for that year reported by the 


United States Census have been reduced to gold value. 
‘* Agriculture’ represents the value of the farms, farm implements and machinery, 


and of live-stock. 
‘* Manufactures’’ represents the capital invested in manufactories. 
*¢ Railroads”’ represents the cost of constructing the railroads. 
Wm. F. ete eso Chief of Bureau. 
TREASURY DEPARTMENT, BUREAU OF STATISTICS, May 4, 1886. . 


The principal facts to be remembered in connection with the fore- _ 


going table are: . 
First. That of the gross accumulations of wealth between 1850 — 


and 1880, as shown by the census, namely, $36,506,219, 722, 


Per eent. 

Farm lands and personal property on same, gave....... Re en 
Capital invested in manufactures..............6. as abc ohgaae pee re ii 

PERIEOAC SG ete SIN go ores inn leh 8G ap eae ee ace Pree rs 

All other industries and suburban property...........eceeccrecescess 68.02 

100.00 


Second. That the percentage of gain in manufactures in the de- 
cades named was as follows: 


Percent. | 
Between 1850'and 1860, low tariff. o.oo ov. co cee cigs cece c s.c'e-a peels bene etc meena 
Between 1860 and 1870, high tariff..... NORE Hera ry Bre, re be re 
Between 1870'and 1880, high tariff... oy... cc 0. ae es oe 0 one yee eee 


Third. That the percentage of gain in farming lands and personal 
property on same was as follows: 


; Per cent. 
Hetween 1850 and 1860, low tariffs ilo. ssc sc wes 0b oda 0's ho 8a een 
Between 1860 and 1870, high tariff.......... obec ett ce sie be 0 Fee 
Between 1870 and 1880, high tariff....... ...... «he "cuasas ears +k tes <aeoee 


Fourth. That had the agricultural resources of the country be- | 
tween 1870 and 1880 maintained the same relative gain shown be- — 


“WILLIAM I. SCOTT. 998 


tween 1850 and 1860, the latter period being under a tariff for revenue — 
and the former under a protective tariff, the increase would have 
been $2,125,000,000 more, or within $665,272,606 of the total value of 
capital invested i in manufactures in the United States in 1880. 
Fifth. That the percentage of manufactures to the wealth of the 


7 - country accumulated in thirty years is only 6.18 per cent. 


I would also refer, here, to the fact that between 1860 and 1880, 
the number of immigrants that arrived in this country, was 5,093,333; 


the larger proportion of which it is reasonable to suppose, engaged 


“ee agricultural pursuits. 


It is also claimed that the balance of trade in our favor since 1873 


e is the result of the protective theory. From 1873 to June 30, 1887, 
_ our exports exceeded our imports by $1,611,973,748. 


Our total exports for the year 1886 were $665,964,529, of which : 
$484, 594,595 were derived from agriculture; and the exports of cotton 


_ and cotton-seed oil, represented in the latter item, were $207,201,616, 


or nearly 50 per cent. of the agricultural products exported, and the 


_ ratio of agricultural products exported to the total exports was 72.8 


per cent. If, sir, the same ratio is applicable to the balance in our 
favor between the years 1873 and 1887, it will show that of this 


balance the non-protected industries of this country— 


The farmer and cotton-planter gave you 72.8, or...........6- 1,173,516,888 
Other AMELIE sa er ON fk ce atten ss et are es wa whee Lele Wine oe 438,456,860 
Total...... ec FLOR eee eee Caen VS ata dew ofoale 1,611,973, 748 


, COAL MINING. 
- Permit me to refer to another great industry in my State, coal 


a mining; an industry, sir, which protection does not protect, and then 
- compare the wages paid in the Edgar Thomson Steel Works with the 
- wages of the skilled miner. 


_ Under the tariff of 1883 the following products manufactured in 


this country, if imported, are subject to the Goes equivalent ad 


valorem duies: 


: . Per cent. 
Meer de POL os ee eset assess tee Uige lathe eicin Cre awle'e UroE ES Gad sien Cenne ae ne ~ 50.50 
ASCO Le OT Si asst ci ie oc etuie ee ates be oa hos Cae ES eae Ces ultoe ee wees 65.26 
Ree ere Kats ego cid Oe Webs Cee ea etal ee lau iec ue 6 46.42 
Se As ES ee angus he Paes «AiG eee T a we ped a Wlet ibwae se SECC 54.57 
Ree STs HER ECd ata tee na coe CA as © 6 ln 2/8 ¥en im moons eRE Pesan Nee 6c 92.75 

2 SERGIO SRN GS RE oS Oe TR Gn ae Rene Be ia at OS ay tn per SE aa 68.26 
PM ee ICC OLCW i Be: seh os, deinicn melas wea me toa was een 102.75 


: 
. 


Twelve or fifteen rails from the Edgar Thomson Steel Works, 
‘on the Youghiogheny River, at Scott Haven, is located the mines of 


a 


GAs Wil S30 RT eee CR eh REISS 


224 WILLIAM L. SCOTT. 
the Youghingheny River Coal Company, a large coal-mining prop- 
erty, employing a large number of men. Coal from these mines has 
for years past been shipped to a greater or less extent to Havana 
Cardenas, Matanzas, Sagua, and other West India ports, in competi- 
tion with the coal produced by the so-called pauper labor of England. 
It is exported largely to Canada; it finds a market as far South via 
the Ocean as Galveston, Tex., and as far North as Boston, Mass. I 
submit, the names of and the actual wages earned by and paid to forty 
skilled miners working at these mines betwen April 1 and December 
1, 1887, in comparison with the wages paid the skilled workmen in the 
Edgar Thomson Steel Works, the latter industry protected by duties 
averaging from 50 per cent. to 102 per cent. ad valorem, as follows: 


Statement showing the earnings of a number of miners regularly employed at 
the Youghiogheny River Coal Oompany’s mines from April 1 to December 


1, 1887. 
Number Total Average 
Name. of days | amount daily 
worked.| earned. jearnings. 
SJMHIOL EIATPINGTON «5.5 scncee seb sek ee vaca ae a SORA St 1684 $636.17 $3.78 
SOE WGI oo ees ec ieee Sek este Laat coe teen das wele rates Hele 1744 780.05 4.48 
AGPOC WW AILETS hls Sarasin baik Gis Uc teqaas vic Saprenee parent de mae eee 1744 529.36 8.04 
FOL ES LE OI sce hoe SORE See slate cD cea Mee sees oe 1764 632.18 3.590 
OREO SGUbHOLIM: noc waist sae < «sacle lols cis areisies sicla eis sieislewiakht & 176 751.32 4.26 
PAGED BOOKS Se oSe octets ob atpiatin a eral ciety AOa'S aliisla's Min ole Sree w MEMES 170} 564.52 3.32: 
AONE DALE Cone won rhc dew! atic voureeinc ae ee ae Demera Geos wee eae tae 152 477.09 3.138 
RELIC NOAM cock cists oink Cites oe laste he sis eee eee eee aoe 166 418.80 2.52 
Valentine Naw sy speci cnsss eee hs s aes vols Qe oe aes Paw 149 565.05 3.79 
SPAIMES MATTOWs whose oe tink Pee e bve Suk bbe oye ees dee FERS eget 177 625.75 3.53 
eines RODINSON cei s GAs re ds oa es oe elec oes Sea aoe ao am. 178 921.00 5.17 
EBL OTAAS SEU COM cis fiche pic ets oe wove lgwinnee De a ain ack w/oiclote ee 163 407 .03 2.50 
Peter MCAINAEN A ce PU a ees s Sess ve oauteee® SR AM eee 174 489.46 2.81 
IB@OrSeDOCTHA VER cisu cise a scsleic a8 lok oo aii were op Wictinen tee 150 485 . 28 3.28 
iehiddy Movesare ly eannnreioaaaertlnrrnce sine e.g, cobra MOo on (ane 153 678.72 4.43 
TAA OMR OR ce Cane bpeluaee ter le CoSe euw eos ehidontueeess 172 450.35 2.61 
TEODOCE MOMMI os oo cic cc ce en cals awa ae aioe ais bia ete bala ine 167 473 83 SS 1 
Charles Mortlec.o ye its. lo se eee ete Py ONEe eee Se 163 451.76 2.77 
IRODETG ELOPMIM aN esc ve owes e ciccs sleeieee sek ween Ae siels aaa GET 179 543.86 3.03 
AFGOTLO) POLIT ices ns aie ods 6! cai eclssinteen paweioeienee ave reskin’ 170 576.70 3.387 
mobert Carroll era ck cen cece wetereran Mise ch podcast ee 171 564.57 3.30 
David Edwards........c.s0.06 ih Meee a Ewrekio’ b Ok be Oe Ns Canes 151 515.90 8.41 
Gia Ples Meta Weoa ales crs ad ue awe ake obama ree Ui ea acer 157 484.09 3.08 
MEPRQUEDG, WihILOne so seek: Cc cakinis eg wet leee bisie bis chon eee sts teeta 156 376 .02 2.41 
MMOnD Melly les susie ce eo we se cee aates EAR ER) FE eee 157 511.01 38.25 
PROT SOI Sere eles ee hee Gig ic edaw'c are ake Siphtle folbna prptolsrote rere eas 167 413.62 2.47 
Owe DOUNEILY BST uoikl bias cee vale ee Lee ee piel VER. Sean 166 519.76 3.13 
LOS ODS VET VLOPELG oo wicie eal ciate eltiele oie t's cee dian ome e a seh ae 167 485.67 2.90 
Sampson Spate....0..2.05.0.0. LNG eta eine ie oiianars eatin ete eraperie 150 5380.05 3.53 
EU DCLURE AMIS G 40) Witty divs c eu aie ch iin eta ek cee ER cas 165 629.97 8.81 
David wakes fos. cose. Meta Go ca ulna aa ole SENS 170 661.47 3.85 
James Abercrombie...... Spite ihe crete one oe Fe arnt ketal 149 426.55 2.86 
BP EUGRAC e AOUITMIAL; Bd vy, Fic olale ws 6 Bic cS ol OSA UUE S CoE RE eo eee 154 430 .26 2.79 
Fea EL OT OI TAT) bio ocean osoaie' py elace bieik cine Pai Hale withe ei ihlp aehiioe athe 170 644.84 3.79 
George ASHOM C0 aol eo.ci docs ews slate coh ss Ae veate bn APOE 169 553.98 3.28 
Aa YG wa 2 Ve) gy AP cE 1 SN SNe Ge Sa MDa IEE Midd Be UR ita Nye rad aha 678.51 2.97 
WVU ARVO OSLO oe cnkc cs viele ol coiate sietelarate ree aah a hretremee eee 163 488.73 2.99 
WohntRGbeErtsOn yes esses So Ue eee ee Peed. ees 163 569.42 3.48 
DOCKS. 2 se please toe Malco Uh he ebeeieeee ER CU eiealde 6,2694 20,942.70 8.34 


Average earnings of each miner for period, $551 ,12. 


: : : 
ci 
; ¢ ree 
ee ae, ¢ 


hi ch a Ph i SOURS: 5? iyi his Ws eae bh Pod ea Ol oh Bia oh oe hl he vae eae ie ot ea een hs tee BOR) cca ale I) 


a 


WILLIAM L. SCOTT. , 225 


The wages paid the foregoing skilled miners, selected as a fair rep- 
resentation of that class, were, highest daily wages for eight hours’ 
work, $5.17, and the lowest, $2.41. Average wages earned per day 

by them, $3.34 per man, and the average total amount earned by each 
man for the same period, $551.12. Of the total number of all 
~ grades of labor, skilled and unskilled, including boys employed in 
and about the mines, namely, 757, the average wages earned per day 
per man was $1.96. 
According to the official report of the Secretary of Internal Affairs 
of the State of Pennsylvania for the year 1884, the number of miners 
employed, wages paid, and tons of coal produced, was as follows: 


Miners. | Wages paid. Coal. 


Tons. 
PREM EACIUGS COM Mia: wiiccca cde wiser chee Si tvesasrastces wales 83,316 | $29,906,262 | 25,651,664 
Pi menGUG COAL. . 2.5... cackie stores civescliconncee nes 38,906 | 14,752,786 | 18,084,941 


Cae i AU EN Eleanor osetia dicey 122,202 | $44,659,048 | 43,736,605 


From a practical experience of over one-third of a century in the 
_ goal-mines of my State, both anthracite and bituminous, I am justi- 
fied in stating that the wage-worker receives for his labor, directly 
and indirectly, from 70 per cent. to 85 per cent. of the selling price 
_ of the coal at the mines, as against the 8 per cent. that labor receives 
- at the Edgar Thomson Steel Works, on the selling price of a ton of 
steel beams. The tariff does not protect the coal-miner, but robs 
him in just so far as it increases the cost of what he consumes by the 
imposition of duties the Government does not need to meet its re- 
quirements. And if time would permit, I could submit facts in con- 
nection with the prices of labor in the various industries of this 
- country, not confined to my own State, but in the States of Iowa and 
Illinois, proving beyond any question, from the pay-rolls I could sub- 
mit, that the average wages received by the wage-worker of the 
country outside of the protected industries show that protection does 
not benefit the wage-worker in the protected industries of the coun- 
try. | 
WOCL. 
IT turn now to another vexed question—wool. When I call it 
vexed, I do not mean that it is not clear or easily solved upon correct 
principles, but only that our friend, the Bourbon, takes his stand 
upon wool and howls the more lugubriously, albeit more unreasona- 
bly, than on anything else, because he hopes there’ to delude the 
_ farming interest to his support, This bill puts wool on the free-list, 


Rs MENA Uy, ae CE Sa ee ENE oe ea yy) Nha nto ce AA es Ve hoe RS Ome ret eae 
* wr a & bd ; ' »* arc) * . pei TD | 
1 e A ssa ita 


926 ee WILLIAM a ‘SCOTT. 


It does so, I make bold to maintain, not only in the interest of the 
woolen manufacturer, but in that of sheep-husbandry itself. 

In referring to the woolen schedule and its effects upon the people 
of my own State, itis fair to infer that relatively it will have the same 
effect upon the people of the other States of the Union. I am com- 
pelled to refer to the census oi 1880, and to resort to statistics, which 
are not as interesting to the general reader as the latest novel, but 
may be more instructive. According to the Agricultural Report of 
1886, the number of sheep in Pennsylvania was 1,189,481; number of 
farms in the State (census of 1880), 213,542; average number of sheep 
to the farm, 5.5; pounds of wool clipped, 5,645,984; average weight 
of fleece, 4% pounds, which, at the estimated market price of to-day, 
32 cents per pound, would give a total value of $1,806,714.88. Should 
the bill as reported by the Committee on Ways and Means become a 
law, the result upon the people of my State would be as follows: 
First, upon the farmers: The 213,542 farms produced, as stated 
above, in 1886, 5,645,984 pounds of wool, equal to 26 pounds of wool 
to the farm, and the duties upon foreign wools of the same quality, 
unwashed, under the present tariff of 10 cents per pound would 
amount to $564,598.40. If making wool free would cause the value 
to decline equal to the duty now imposed, which it would not, in my 
judgment, it would show a gross loss to the 213,542 farms of $2.60 
each, or a totol of $564,598. Per contra, the per capita consumption 
of domestic and imported woolen and worsted goods, according to 
the census of 1880, was $6.50, which multiplied by five, the estimated 
average number in a family, would be $32.50. 


The proposed reduction in the woolen schedule is 29 per cent. from the 
present tariff, or 29 per cent. of the cost of the woolen goods con- * 
sumed, which would be an equivalent saving of..................... $9.42 

The proposed reduction of the duties on sugar, namely, $11,000,000 on 
the imports, and $1,000,000 reduction on the cost of home production, 
would be $12,000,000, or the equivalent of 20 cents per capita on a 


population of 60,000,000, or on a family of five........... a le ee 1.00 
10.42 
From which deduct the estimated loss to each family He cn oben eT 2.60 


It would on these two items alone show a saving to ae family in the 
State of Pennsylvania of...........cceceseees Sas iy oh eee hee 7.82 


The profit and loss account of the bill under consideration to the 
people of the State, based on the population of 1880, namely, 4,282, - 
891, would show a saving of $1.56 each, or $6,681,309.96 on these two 
items alone, and not taking into consideration the large savings 


+t SOI Oe ee ee 


a Wiss cal ee | 


“— - 


PL sili trata aoe te eee a iat tae Ae OR rs. eR nag SSR RIL hs 


that will accrue to them from the other proposed reductions under 
the bill. But let us examine the woolen schedule as proposed in 


the bill, from the standpoint of the Pennsylvania manufacturer of 
~ woolen and worsted goods, and which I claim is applicable to the 


woolen manufacturers of the whole country. According to the cen- 
sus of 1880 there were in the State of Pennsylvania manufacturing 
establishments of woolen goods as follows: — 

Number of mills or factories producing— 


PROMO ONE ecg orion cde <0 An aE Qe nd nicia’s Ve en wepice nln) cared © pasa o aiee 324 
PTOI FINS ere gthe. ors i ela Sa vowinlae Sy pwirit bene Sek cine Se he oe Ok pt eects 23 
OTRO CMS. Grea wie aac wae tee CN Ge sinle tia niagte oie owned dane ake ee 28 
PE ae aun had ae MOTI cB 'k Rios Scetghs oe Shea heal wht seat ana ae eae 375 
PPORAMNOUNL “OL: CAPICAL IJ VESLOU Vc < vnc wiis wove a's Geen aclenice a gnlaeis $24,537,743 
Peay Of tiearial Use LOT ONE: VOAr Way ga aie als wines ase valle une mets wid 29,497,945 
RPL NVA CS IIG hp ae cial s esi Heli ego hala eis © Had Rete De ee ee Oy 7,046,273 
‘Pounds of woot consumed, grown in the United States............ 28,556,077 
- Imported wools, pounds............. By eR Raa 4 Ure Scale wee eho sa 5,005,271 
Total consumption of wool, pounds... 2... csc se ccc ee ee 33,061,348 

Total value of the manufactured articles produced for the 
WORE CMU TUN WU; LOOU cs cokts es eras cs dee hemis ees $44,132,590 

_ Average number of hands employed: 

PEM ated OVEr CIMEE He occ nc eye boleWis he sade bs eos eh adigoa eae 10,790 
emia leraowion tice acti coi aes ce eels saad Su obw Cawear ea eels 9,477 
MIE TY Peete hoi ec eer ke cleo eh ee Beenie ee cre we ae ye wc waaS 3,071 

. Hi Gigth MUM DES (OL DCTSOUS ¢ bee Haw s\n bein shy ces va ecele ciply deohe 23,838 
Average wages paid per hand per year..............cecceeeeceees $287.20 


It will be seen’ that while Pennsylvania consumed 33,561,348 


a f pounds of wool in her mills in the year 1880, she only produced 
within the State, in 1886, 5,645,984 pounds, or 164 per cent. of the 


quantity required in 1880, and that there were employed in this in- 
dustry 23,8388 of her population. It is hardly necessary to discuss 
the importance of cheap raw material to such an industry. Wool 
is the purest raw material, if any commodity known to trade can 
be designated as raw material. That it is to a very great extent 


_ the product of the soil and climate where it is grown is unquestion- 
~ able. Now, the entire fleece of no animal can be used, as a rule, in 


the manufacture of the same kinds and qualities of cloth. In other 
words, the wool grown on different parts of a sheep not only has a 


different value but is adapted to different purposes, and while the © 


unwashed wools of South America lose from 66 per cent. to 70 per 
cent. of their weight in washing, those of Australia show a shrink- 


WILLIAM L. SOOTT. 207 


a 


Meant Mia Nd ken, URE Oe tN et a oc 


- 


228 WILLIAM L. SCOTT. 


age of but from 52 to 60 per cent., and the English and the Irish ~ 


_ wools show a shrinkage of but from 33 to 35 per cent. Under exist- 
ing conditions the home manufacturer is unable to supply his mills 
with foreign wools, and the large importations of woolen goods, to 
which I will refer, is the result. To enable the manufacturer of this 
country to compete in his home market and to export a surplus 
abroad, he must be able to purchase his wool as favorably not only 
as to price but as to selection of qualities and kinds as does his for- 
eign competitor. 

The estimated total production of wool in the United States in 
1886, according to the best authorities, was 300,000,000 pounds, and 
the estimated amount required, or its equivalent in woolen or worsted 
goods, to meet our necessities was 600,000,000 pounds. It will be 
seen, therefore, that we did not produce in 1886 within 300,000,000 
pounds of wool necessary for our home consumption. The importa- 
tions for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1887, were 23,000,000 pounds, 
which would leave an estimated deficit of 277,000,000 pounds. We 
can best ascertain how this deficit in our requirements is made up by 
referring to the importations of manufactured woolen and worsted 
goods for the year ending June 30, 1887, which amounted to $42,448, - 
127.04, upon which there was collected by the; Government a tax of 


—$29,256,442.90. Not one pound of American wool was used in the 


manufacture of the woolen and worsted goods covered by these 
large importations, nor did an American wage-worker receive one 
dollar in connection with their manufacture; and it is a conceded 
fact to-day that of all our industries not one is so depressed as the 


woolen industry. If there can be an exception, it is that of the car-’ 


pet manufacturers, which can be accounted for from the fact that 
the duties on the wools used by them are merely nominal, while on 
the higher grades they are practically prohibitory. The present 
duty of 10 cents per pound on unwashed wools is equivalent to 30 
cents per pound on scoured wools. 

No better illustration of the results of moderate duties or free raw 
material can be pointed to than the carpet industries of this country. 
Russian carpet wools, grown in Southern Russia, bordering on the 
Black Sea, practically scoured, are largely imported into the United 
States for the manufacture of carpets. A fair average price for these 


long combing wools at Black Sea ports is from 17 cents to 20 cents per - 


pound, our currency. The duty upon same under our existing tariff, 
is 5centsper pound. Wool, scoured, suitable for the manufacture of 
men’s wear, under the present tariff, pays 30 cents per pound. To- 
day, owing to this low duty on carpet wools and the superior genius 
of our American workmen and notwithstanding the higher wages 


+ 


© vagst ee ae ee oy Uy a te pam a 
Se Wife i 


WILLIAM TL. BOOPE A 8 ONG 


paid in the United States, I am credibly informed that if this 5 cents 
per pound is removed from Donskoi and other carpet wools we can 
compete with the world on carpets, and keep our home market. 
o But another important factor meets the manufacturer in the pur- 
_ chase of his wools; it is those artificial restrictions and resulting 
- complications which deprive him of the mastery of his cwn business. 
and often makes the difference between complete success and total 
failure; and in this connection it may be well to inquire how the 
tariff of 1883 has affected the woolen and worsted industries of the 
country, particularly in connection with our home market, which the 
protectionists are so desirous of keeping for our home manufacturers. 
' A statement of the cost of producing a pound of worsted yarns in 
_ . this country and in England, under the existing tariff, taking the 
yarns as the basis of the cost of the manufactured article, may per- 
haps account for the present condition of our woolen and worsted 
'__ industries and the large importations I have referred to; and I sub- 
mit the following tables: 


ay 


Sete No. 1.—Cost of making 1 pound of 30s yarn out of English wool under ~ 
the present tariff in the United States. 


‘ Ss '' Wool, cost in London 11d. or in United States currency.......... a $0.22 


_ Commissions, freight, and charges, say..........sseeeceeeeeeeeeeeees .02 
; i : Duty. ei eer eres oe eres eee se eee esses eeeeeesee COCOSHTO SCH SHOES EL HO OeE eee 10 
ig ae : Sas Ses 
a 34 
oa as 
_ Take, say, of greasy wool......-...- bee deedievedciceseseuss« pounds.. 100.00 
_ . Which would shrink.............. Sea ae cok Mer Cas oe aires do.... 20.00 
oS Adavinig Of Clean WOOL: ccc ediscdd cach Lene tase cron usta do.... 80,00 
. Lighty pounds, costing $34, equals 424 cents per pound clean, or 100 
BM OUICS COSS. 0 . o ek wes ee ssn map se sesh ether eeeweesettsebtcrniscs $42.50 
4 Deduct value of noil made, 10 pounds, at 25 CentS... 0.50... ccc cacece 2.56 
be Diviee by; top; produced, 90 pounds) <2). seis see onesie eine visite vee 6% 40.00 
__ Equals 44 cents, cost of top. 
_ ‘Take 1 pound of top, costing..... .....-.+.... ides ee Pie a Re Rati BRN 44 
Spimning to 80s, including Waste... .....5..ccesssesccensadeseceneccess 24 
Cost of 1 pound yarn under existing tariff... ..... ccc cc eeecees 7a 
fo Market price of this yarnin England, 1s. 8d., OF... ec ecceccccscecesass 4G 
_ Add duty, 12 cents and 25 per cent. ad valorem......... 2G oe ee 26 
mommission, freight, and Charges... .....-.-ccceccasceseececessvewces 04 


Oe ape Ly Oe of heyy AE Se eatiaee hon. peeks S) Mie: | Aa ie Se ee 
sa ahead nt <i ers pens eS en Diem, ss Bh") ye 


980 WILLIAM 1. SCOTT. 


This table shows that under the tariff of 1883 you can import 1 
pound of 30s yarn, manufactured in England, for 2 cents per pound — 
less than it can be made in the United States for, out of English wool — 
imported into this country. 


TABLE No. 2.—Cost of making 1 pound of 30s worsted yarn out of English wool, 
under the bill under consideration—wool free. 


“HOG pounds Of WOOl. at 22, CENTS. visas cw eiee ose «vate c Sethe sere See $22.00 


Commissions, freight, and. charges, [05.4.5 9e1cswes «cs oNd sss > snes ee 2.00 
OU aie seis ele oe avis wala side cto tnbatbeiceloigea nine wig siety ofa prate ieicte  aeeeann 24.00 
$0 pounds costing $24 = 380 cents pound, clean, or— fee 
LOD PpoOWNds COSTE 2. cis. 2 ies areR Ca tek. ide ais Syst Oe ote Sate tae ee 30.00 
Deduct value of noil made, 10 pounds at 25 cents..... + le a0 be eee 2.50 
Divide by: top produced, 90 pounds... ...<s a. <3 «tiie we a eles senRnEEan 27.50 
Equals 80 cents cost of top. 
eke A Pound: Of 1Op; COSTING... < .o isc 0s & o's s wheel opis teeu edie ate ee ee 80 
pee tO O0s, McClung waste. .s..ss5 osaayns cbc oes ce =a cae cee gee .28 
Gost of 1: pound yarn under present bill... .....00 ..eseccce seme .58 
Market price of this ;yarn’in- Eneland, 1s:8de-or'... 3.7... aa eee Bee: 
Add \dunes,-40 per cent. ad valorem}. 22005 ¢ . 455 24i0e Se 10 Geek ee RS 
Commissinuis; freight, and-charges, 25 0.4 3.0! aes We ci ieee ee 04, 
POU sc as. 5) 0 oe orn 6 0:4 ae ene oes © bony ee a ale ieee Sor 8 co 60's 


This table shows that under thie proposed bill 1 wound of the same 
yarn made r:0m English wool can be made in the United States for 
over 2 cents per pound less than it can be imported from England 
for, and the cost of production reduced 14 cents per pound less than 
it costs under the tariff of 1883. 


TABLE No. 8.—Cost ¢f- making 1 pound of 36s fine worsted yarn out of Austra 
lian wool, under tariff of 1883. 


Wool cost in London 11d., or in United States currency: is \o<eteeeee $0.22 

Pomuissions, freight, auc charges, say...) 0.5 <eicas o<sc one Dee 0.02 

Eis re win baw dn Oss los Ou wale blalauaee’s « sa shuslonute tees cine cee ne an 0.10 

PRS oe cna 59:50 ety taes LEK ETE PNT PEC ie 0.34 
Pounds. 

BAKE SAY; Ob, SECASY WOOL’... ss e es soeis seis 8b got te od 2.0 sig’ oan is 100 


ey hich willshpink Oo pér Lentil o.. sa gecave sore nes ee eee EPs es 55 ae 


Leaving clean wool eeeey r ere TPE Pe a 45 


aR sn Saal Soo, a ea wa et aces nal toe ee 
OTS i ee BR GE Ds 5 


i Rice oT ene 
= WILLIAM L. 8007'T. eens 
3 45 pounds, costing $34 = "5 cents per pound, clean, or 100 pounds, . 
‘a PER Orc, God a bho WRC Toe inserts bib his ueie Sige coke Sa Latent e ee $75.00 
_. Deduct value of noils made, 18 pounds, at 45 cents................... 8.10 
| Divide by top produced, 82 pounds... ...........00. dee ips aeheer 66,90 © 
Equals 82 cents, cost of top per pound. . 
» Take 1 pound of top, costing.........:.seeee. Pee Oe aire ted Mie a teree cat $0.82 
Beane t0 O08, InCludiINg WASLOscs3 5 64s b veoh te de wace lvoge bac atees's 0.35 
q Cost of J potnd- yarn under existing tariil. . 35... less leaves 1.17 
j Market price of this yarn in England, 28. 53d., Or .... cc. ce ce ceencees . $0.59 
: Add duties, 18 cents and 35 per cent. ad valorem..........ccccececces 0.39 - 
7 Womuncsions, treieht, and Charees Ns) o Oh. et eek, oA tec kee eehes 0.04 
PRGUSE oui eatas cate Katevice cs de oe woh se tee tie cs Jae Relea beet ote 1.02 


_ This table shows that it costs 15 cents per pound more under the 

tariff of 1883 to make 1 pound of fine worsted yarn in the United 
- States, out of Australian wool, than what the same yarn can be_ 
made for in England and imported into the United States: 


aw J 


; TaBLE No. 4.—Cost of making 1 pound of 36s fine worsted yarn out of Austra 
lian wool, under the bill now before the House—wool free 


f ; 
j e100 pounds of wool; at 22 cents: 5... cece eee cd ee cocks denecvsteebecse: $22.00 
a Commissions, freisht; and Charges. aid. cick sete cess coe aces vou ules oes 2.00 
= iad} fain Peciciys able av eOlgeres ERR ae NL ean 24.00 
- - 45 pounds costing $24 = 53 cents per pound, clean, or 100 pounds, 
I Cn yt tn soy esd nae cae we cate CRARN sb oleld Wa wh ete ore itige One 53.00 
- __ Deduct value of noils made, 18 pounds, at 45 cents............. a rueaes 8.10 
i: ge 2s | 44.90 
P Equals 55 cents cost of top per pound. 
@ wake 1 pound of top, Costing. s0eccs ce veces cet ees wee Ved coteas, anions ito 
' Spinning to 36s, including waste... .....c.0..0- Eee ebay satay ee ecco a: .85 
s * : Cost of yarn under proposed bill....... pak eae as SCerepnen ice ves .90 
Market price of this yarn in England, 28. B4d., OF.......0seese0eesenes .59 
meeeendd duties, 40 percent. ad valorem... oi. oes. cece cece eee eensucevee 24 
Commissions, freight, and charges........... weet ees eaede relmbeet te 04 
Total oer oe ee Fe o Dah pe eta pat Toa ha tia Wane ee 87 


939 WILLIAM 1. SCOTT. eed! 


This table shows that under the proposed bill it will cost 3 cents 
per pound more to make 1 pound of yarn of the same quality and — 
wool in the United States than it can be imported from England 
for, but that the proposed bill reduces the cost of manufacture in the © 
United States and the import price 15 cents per pound less than it 
now costs. 


TABLE No. 5.—Cost of making 1 pound of 36s yarn out of Australian cross-breds 
under the present tariff. 


Wool, costing in London 14d., or in United States currency........... $0.28 
Commissions, freight, and charges, s@y. ones. ecesacessccecetseeeepen 02 
RORLY 15 a's og ome ise's O08 4 pp oe nibielsa 59 0S yee stipe clos al G.a/s.cb tis. 0 sie beeen 10 
Total er,reeoevae eee e eee 6 Geo & @eeeeoeeo 6 ees eeee ee @@eeoeoeoe' eae eee 40 
Mice, Sh; OL STCASY. WOOL. o. cuss cee sibaas Sauces b awiets ba atRee pounds.. 100 
Which would shrink 80 per cent... ......ccececeee $9 oie Sua eae do.... 30 
ducawine-cleah: wooli.. 5. sii Gale saaresle Cane wede uh eae er do.... 70 
70 pounds, costing $40 = 57 cents per pound»clean, or 100 pounds cost. . $57.00 
Deduct value of noil made, 15 pounds at 35 cents...........000--eeeee 5.25 
Divide by top produced, 85 pounds.............. 2 sais ee 51.75 
Equals 61 cents cost of top. 
Take J pound.of topy.COStIng. 2:5. 5 escea ose 00 sad eiews sleds cea webs ae .61 
Spinning to 86s including waste............e068. sevece pees te cbse war 89 
Cost of 1 pound of yarn under existing tariff........cccssceeceee .96 
Market price of this yarn in England, 2s., 2d., or... .s...00. ee 52 
Add duty 18 cents and 35 per cent. ad valorem. ..........seeeees “shane 87 
Commissions, freight, and charges............... pints slaauts ba ee obau Ue Uaoee 
MOG 0505 CC SG ip ads bes Siw WN nantly bie se Mig ey an or egecaun. Silea noe ooets eg .93 


This table shows that it costs 3 cents per pound more fer: the 
tariff of 1883 to make 1 pound of this yarn in the United States out 
‘of Australian cross-bred wool than what the same yarn can be had 
for in England and imported to the United States. 
TABLE No. 6.—Cost of making 1 pound of 36s yarn out of Australian cross- 
breds under the bill now before the House. 


100 pounds of) WOO], at 28 Cents... oc ..<. oe ee welelj ewe as sack oy eee eke enn $28.00 
Commissions, freight, ‘and charges. ., vc. sissies emer t's nave Wats s ioasen ne 2.00 


re eee <a ek Be oe 


the ee TRL ey ene SON, Ril wach ER eee tee eee ee sone fe “s aa at rs mail ne mal ig So = a ye baer” ht ae tS Sd ae ier Fae ee 
ee bs “Ens fe Me See tae oe: ong Air steee = ed cate ; SAE gM Le a Sy oe a ee en ee ge oe a Oe ee ee eee , 
z gS avons < B, , Noe 7 2 : ts o~ one pte oe has % 
5 iret " ’ : 2 i aM é Tha ae ¥ at ee a 
“i: 4 Z =3 ’ me ; ‘ ? - . a . : 7 Se 


Pe er ee yee sas eR eC a ce MER eas ae a aT A SOFC aang ee coe NI Rr M7 ak ca 


- = F 
cal ‘ 


WILLIAM L. 8COTT. : 233 

70 pounds, costing $30 = 48 cents per pound clean, or 100 pounds cost.. 48.00 
Deduct value of noils made, 15 pounds, at 35 cents....... wdibteia ee eaeare 5.25 
_ Divide by top produced, 85 pounds............ PREECE Ls oN 
Equals 45 cents cost of top. 
eta DOUMU-OL TOP; COSUIND iets Ue re dai eels S ovles eertie vuelesay sibs 45 
Spinning to 36s, including waste. .........-6..00. wae el dia oidin’s «iatel orton, .80 
Cost of 1 pound of yarn under proposed bill,......... Mee cera .80 

- Market price of this yarn in Enoland, *2s) 20 Ores. ee en Sa ca eevee .52 
Pree OUMes, 20 DEL CENns, Ad. VALOTEMT eos 4 wis'cae' o5'sruie b's eis’ sles a wales Manned 
Sem SIORS, LTeCIb, ANG COARSER. Pee Sh wets cine ne co 4 be vo oiha ey Paes 04 
MVM OE NU Sc Ogee sy sik oid ale tis 6 SHE ee cw terclek Gly a RC ee U7 


_ This table shows that under the proposed bill it will cost 3 cents 
per pound more to make 1 pound of yarn of the same quality and 
wool in the United States than it can be imported from England 


for, but that the proposed bill reduces the cost of manufacture in 


the United States and the import price of 16 cents per pound less 
than it now costs. 

The aim of the majority of the committee has been, first, to read- 
just the duties upon woolen and worsted goods so as to enable the 
manufacturers not only to pay the same wages they are now paying 
but to cheapen goods, thus enabling them to command the home 
market, which they are largely deprived of, and to compete in the 


oo foreign one. Free raw wool and the duties proposed on the manu- 
_ factures of wool will accomplish that object unless we are griev- 


ously mistaken. ‘‘ But what,” cries the politician, ‘‘ of the flock and 
the flock-owner; will not the removal of the duty reduce the value of 
the fleece by just that amount ?” In my judgment, it will not. Even 


if it did, the average flock-owner, in common with all other hus- 


bandmen, would gain more than his loss in the reduced cost of the 
necessaries of life provided in this bill. But let us see the probable 


effect upon the value of wool, should wool pass to the free-list. Wool, 


like every other commodity, is governed by the law of supply and 
demand. We now produce in this country about three hundred 
millions of pounds less then we require, as is cloarly shown by our 


consumption of imported woolens. Immediately wool is free, our 
~ manufacturers begin to draw upon the markets of the world for raw 
~ material to meet the American demand. The result is an advance in 
wool in foreign markets, and an advance abroad would advance the 


price here, tariff or no tariff. And this is no mere speculation; it is 


Bat ye Be Oe ee a Se ee a” a. | ee Oe Ut. ee ee SST ee ag ee er ee OR TA me i a Eg 
: pk Are hoe i ° = St ae 7 7K betes ah foe o 


234 WILLIAM L. SCOTT. 


the known history of wool under the circumstances supposed. Alber — 
Gallatin, as far back as 1832, stated the facts as follows, and pre | 
- cisely as any reasonably-informed economist would state them to- 
day: 


The object of the wool-growers is that that market should be enlarged, but 
this cannot be done effectually unless the domestic manufacturer is firmly es- 
tablished; and for that purpose it is necessary that the raw materials should be 
obtained on reasonable terms. 'To enhance its price by persevering in the ex- 
isting exhorbitant duties is not less inconsistent with sound policy than with 
justice. * * * The value of the hides and raw skins imported free of duty and 
consumed in the United States has for the last nine years exceeded $1,800,000 
ayear. It is evident that if in order to protect the raising of American cattle 

‘by giving an additional value to the hide a high duty had. been laid on those 
imported, the domestic manufacture of leather in all its branches, instead of 
being in its present flourishing state, would have been most materially injured, 
and we should have been obliged either to import from Europe or to purchase 
at exhorbitant prices all those articles which it now supplies at a moderate rate. 

The reduction in England of the duty on foreign wool to 4 cents a pound 
has caused a fall in price of the woolen goods without injuring the wool- 
grower at home. The free introduction of the species not raised here would, 
by encouraging the manufacture generally, ultimately enlarge the market for 
the domestic wool. It is the only way to introduce the manufacture of 
blankets and to reduce the price of home-made flannels and of the coarser 
species of cloth. 


We produce in this country some wools equal to any in the 
world, but most of them are the coarser and cheaper grades, which 
are best adapted for the filling of the manufactured goods; while the 
long-fibered wools of England, America, and Australia are specially 
adapted for the warps. The wools of Texas, the Territories, and the 
Pacific Slope, where the sheep are largely pastured on the Govern- 


ment domain, or vast stretches of land comparatively valueless, are 


the lower grades. They cannot be used without admixture of the 
higher grades, and were the manufacturer able to import these 
higher grades free, the circumstances would immediately enlarge 
the market, and raise the prices of domestic wools, a proposition not 
in the least doubtful, but borne out by our experience in the past. 


OUR MERCHANT MARINE, 


No people can be a great people who do not ‘‘go down to the sea 
in ships.” With longer coast lines than any other nation in the 
world, producing a greater quantity of sea-borne tonnage, if we 
eliminate coal, we are yet dependent upon other nations for shipsto —_ 
do our carrying. But for the energy and enterprise of the English _ 


Ga ae PEM Re teak Bent: te NOOR Ss: ie ee (oe ie Agha. cg YI Rea 


people during the past thirty years it would be impossible for us to 
find transportation for the commodities we produce in excess of our 
own requirements for exportation, and we are dependent upon the 
_ foreigner to-day for the marketing of our surplus, produced, by the 
way, almost exclusively by our unprotected industries. Transporta- 
tion enters so largely into the cost of sea-borne merchandise as to 
average 10 per cent. of the value of the commodity transported; and 
while England and her colonies owned 58 per cent. of the sea-going 
tonnage of the world, according to the returns of 1883; the propor- 
tion of the United States was 4.5 per cent.; and it can hardly be de- 
nied that the profits of England from this source will far exceed the 
apparent difference between her exports and imports, as shown by 
her trade reports. 
4 - What has brought about this state of affairs? If we go back to 
1860, we find that of our own exports and imports, American vessels 
carried 67 per cent. as against 33 per cent. in foreign bottoms, and 
_ that in 1882 we carried 16 per cent. as against 84 per cent. in foreign 
-bottoms; and the Annual Report of the Chief of the Bureau of Sta- 
tistics, for 1887, page 59, says: ‘‘There was a decline in the proportion 
of value of commodities carried in our own vessels, from 75 per cent. 
_. tn 1856, to 14 per cent. in 1887. Prior to the year 1860, the ships of 
the world were constructed of wood, and the great sea-carrying trade 
of the world was done by sailing vessels. The great pineries of the. 
State of Maine and the white oak of the swamps of Florida could not 
E - be combined into a trust. American ingenuity and enterprise were 
free to exert themselves in any direction that led to prosperity. In 
~ 1860 the sea-borne tonnage of the world flying the American flag was 
. about equal to that of England. We were the second if not-the first 
& - maritime people i in the world. At that date the relative population 


between England and the United States was, England 28,730,000, and 
the United States 31,440,000. According to the census of 1880, our 
population exceeded fat of England by 15,760,000 and the relaniva 
sea-borne tonnage of the world was, England 58 per cent. and the 
United States 4.5 per cent.” : 
-Ithink I hear some of my Republican friends ask, ‘‘ What of the 
Alabama and the Shenandoah?” and they will tell you that the war of 
_ the rebellion exterminated the flag of our trade from the ocean. I 


ship-owners transferring their wooden ships to foreign flags; 
and if in these transfers they received a fair equivalent of their 
value at that time, from a pecuniary and commercial point of 
view, the country ought to have been a large gainer by the transac- 
tion. The wooden sailing-ship was doomed in the year 1860, and_the 


mS WELLIAM L. SOOT. | 235 


will admit that the war of the rebellion was the cause of American 


OES os eee es ae? et Ps Ai Niood, 2 BO eter ee Cee a tae PO Oe ey a aor 7 ee ae gg ee Oe 


936 “‘WILLIAM L. SCOTT. 


iron and steel ship, propelled by steam, was destined to supplant it 
upon economic grounds. The life of an iron ship and the cost of ~ 
maintaining it, as compared with a wooden ship, its ability to carry — 


20 per cent. more cargo than a wooden ship of the same custom- 


house tonnage, the utilization of the compound engine, followed by 
the triplicate and to-day the quadruple engine, bringing the con- 
sumption of fuel down to a minimum, and making steam abso- 
lutely cheaper as a propelling power than the winds, all combined to 
doom the wooden ship. The construction of the Suez Canal left it 
no longer optional as to what the ship of the future was to be. Can 
it be claimed that the people of this nation could not and would not 
have adjusted themselves to this changed condition of affairs, had 
not unwise legislation prevented them from doing so? What is a 
steel or iron ship? What proportion of its cost consists of structural 
iron or steel beams? And how was it possible for the individual en- 
terprise of this country to engage in the construction of iron ships 
when steel beams could be bought in England for $26.88 per ton, 
while the same beams cost in the United States 3.3 cents per pound, 
or $66 per ton? What has brought us to this low state? The policy 
of restriction. Protecting afew sickly ship-yards, we turn out an 
occasional vessel for the coastwise trade. 

Under this policy, cruel, barbarous, Bourbon, our magnificent 
foreign merchant-marine has sunk into insignificance, and that sem- 
inary of dauntless sailors, that sure reserve of national defense, 
which once excited the admiration of Burke and of Chatham, has dis- 
appeared under the blight of your illiberal laws! We rank, in conse- 
quence, far down, not merely in our capacity to carry on the seas, 
but in our ability to fight on them. And because we have ceased to 
be a respectable naval power, we hear to-day the proposition to 
empty the Treasury upon land defenses, to take the place of the sea 
defenses you have blindly destroyed, 


THE THEORY OF PROTECTION. 


And now i will briefly state what I understand to be the theory 
of protection as advocated by the Republican party, and what thaf 
_ party claims to be the practical results of such a policy upon the 
country, as shown by the last thirty years, in its favor. 

First. That a tariff for protection has given and will give the 
wage-workers working in the protected industries of the country 
higher wages, steadier work, and cheaper living. 

Second. That the duties imposed on the agricultural products of 
the country protect the farmer, give him a home market at an en- 


WILLIAM L. SCOTT. } 93) 


_ hanced price for his produce, and lessen the burdens he would other- 
wise be subject to. 

Third. That the policy of protection has made the country rich — 
and prosperous whenever high protective tariffs have prevailed, and 
_ that the reverse has been the case under moderate tariffs for rev- 

enue with incidental protection; and the protectionists point to the 
immense accumulations of wealth in the United States in the three 
decades between 1850 and 1880, namely, $7,135,780,228 in 1850, and 
$43, 642,000,000 in 1880, or an increase of $36,506,219,722 in thirty 
years. 
This is all that is claimed for protection. 
If these propositions can be demonstrated to be true by practical 
results, I pledge myself to vote with the gentlemen on the other ae 
of the House.| 
I claim that I have shown by the facts submitted that even the 
skilled wage-worker employed in the protected industries of the 
: country receives no higher and often not as high wages as the wage- 
worker in the unprotected industries of the country. That while 
undue protection does not increase the wages of the wage-worker 
employed in the manufacturing industries of the country, it adds 
enormously to the cost of his living, as well as to that of the minis- 
ter of the gospel, the doctor, the lawyer, the carpenter, the mason, the 
blacksmith, the widow and the orphan, and that large class of our 
people living upon limited incomes, those too old to work; and upon 
‘no class are its effects more disastrous than upon the agricultural 
-. elasses; that the home-market theory to the farmer is a fallacy ; that 
__.. if the census of 1880 is reliable, and that 17,392,099 of our population 
were engaged in the five great classes of occupations, of the agri- 
cultural products produced and consumed in the United States the 
relative consumption would be as follows: 


- Per cent. 

" PCIOMALUTO fey «9, c:0-ni4 a telon'a'e Vs. @ wiejs'e s39 gicre genre pialvallt'e.s +s %,670,498, or 44.1 
, Professional and personal Services. ....cc.ccceescsscesens 4,074,288, or 23.4 
ee ANC ATANSHOMAION:, «oases» ye 'view aie «ede om e's sae as ees 1,810,256, or 10.4 
Mining PR OOM PIC CTIN GE ios cia Wore apna win t's, sig/a'a ei earere acu fe 1,104,517, or 6.4 
SRS E UT Netra are wot Seis eo aieaiaie|s ele a sistoun Geile Mi AEG one « 2,732,595, or 15.7 

SE Ot ers tae leds Ble eek ered Fog aire antele tate acta ence 17,892,099 100.0 


Which would show that the farmers and those dependent upon 

_ them were consumers to the extent of 44.1 per cent. of what they 
produced themselves, while ‘three classes named consumed 40.2 per 
cent., leaving only 15.7 per cent. for those engaged in manufacturing. 


eae, 


‘ 43 ney Lanes ss | ere fase, hs des iat Lass aks ee a 


3 Sl. aaa ie PE i Mason Sika MON he MS Aaa Sa SS uiheN ba Seka sgt a. 2 SS a Seat ga 


DB8— | WILLIAM ve scorT. 


That the protection theory has exterminated our shipping from 
the seas of the world; that the table submitted, showing how the " 
accumulated wealth of the United States has been made between the 
years 1850 and 1880, demonstrates that protection to home industries 
had little or nothing to do with it. 


THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. 


We are here—we, the majority of the Ways and Means Commit- 
tee, and of this House—in defense of American industry. We alone 
offer it protection; we seek alone the independence and aggrandize- 
ment of domestic labor by liberating it from unnatural restraints. 
and allowing it the undisturbed possession and the complete enjoy- 
ment of its own earnings. The other side offer it—what? A 
monopolized market from which to buy the necessaries of life on the 
one hand, and on the other a labor market subject to the caprice 
of trusts! In short, they promise it the inestimable boon of 
working in the protected industries, where no share of the bounty 
alleged protection affords is allotted to labor, and of bearing in com- 
mon with the rest of the people of the United States the terrible 
exactions of the protective system to enrich the privileged classes, 

Will laboring men accept that generous tender and vote with the 
monopoly party under coercion of the employer? If they do, the 
hideous disaster, foreseen by Jefferson, as the natural result of the 
restrictive and subsidy policy, will rush down upon us, and the Gov- 
ernment of the Union will pass into the hands of those who openly 
‘propose to pervert its powers and employ them to plunder the peo- 
ple for their own enrichment. I do not believe that American lib- 
erty is destined to be extinguished in this ignominious fashion. 
Surviving, as it has, armed assault, and every form of intrigue, it 
will not perish of the base corruption of subsidy; it will not be 
throttled by mere greeds or smothered by vile monopoly. 

As to the spirit of this side of the House, the spirit in which we 
enter this struggle for the very life of the Constitution and the 
emancipation of American labor, I cannot better express it than in 
the language of Andrew Jackson, the illustrious Democrat and be- 
loved patriot, who, like our Presidential leader of to-day [applause], 
summoned the people to the reclamation of precious rights, slowly 
and almost imperceptibly filched away by the money power in a 
long course of years. ‘‘ No,” said the immortal hero: 


No; the ambition which leads me on, is an anxious desire and a fixed de- 
termination, to return to the people, unimpaired, the sacred trust they have 
confided to my charge—to heal] the wounds of the Constitution and preserve it 
from further violation ; to persuade my countrymen, so far as I may, that it ig 


WIETIAM TE. 800TH? . ~. + 939) 


; 

4 not ina splendid government, supported by powerful monopolies and aristo- 
: cratical establishments, that they will find happiness, or their liberties pro- 
4 tected, but in a plain system, void of pomp—protecting all, and granting 
- - favors to none—dispensing its blessings like the dews of heaven, unseen and 
-unfelt, save in the fresheness and beauty they contribute to produce. It is such 
a government that the genius of our people requires—such a one only under 
which our States may remain for ages to come, united, prosperous, and free, 

; ‘ 

3 


- [Prolonged applause. ] 
During the delivery of the foregoing remarks the following col- 
loquy occurred: 
Mr. Bayne. Will my colleague [Mr. Scott] permit a question. 


Mr. Scott. I will yield for a question, provided the gentleman 
_ does not attempt to answer it himself. 


7 Mr. Bayne. My colleague stated a few moments ago that wheat 
; is produced on land in Dakota, where land is worth almost nothing 
per acre; and that it is also produced by the farmer on lands 


- Now, if a plant such as that of Carnegie Brothers were placed 
out in the Territory of Dakota, will my colleague explain whether 
the rise in the value of the lands surrounding that plant, to $100 
‘an acre, would not be an advantage to the people of Dakota and 

to the farmer who would produce wheat on the adjacent land ? 
Mr. Scott. I will answer my colleague very briefly. The value 


_ Imayputupa magnificent building upon which I may spend a mill- 

ion dollars, and yet I may have to go to the poor-house to live, so 
far as the income from that building is concerned. The question is, 

2 what is the value of that farm to enable the farmer to live and raise 
_ his crops? 

Mr. Bayne. Or sell his land for other purposes and realize a 

profit. 

ce Mr. Scort. Suppose his land was sold under an execution by the 

__ sheriff at a loss. But my colleague must excuse me. I would give 

way to him, but I cannot. The House having kindly extended my 

time, I must not trespass upon its kindness. | 


ae 


near Carnegie Brothers’ mills, where land is worth $100 an acre. - 


of any property is not in what it costs, but in what it will produce. © 


a 
Fd 


2 ; . : ee ae r. 
; % 


HON. BENJ. BUTTERWORTH, 


OF OHIO. 
(Republican Side.) 


No member of this House need apologize for asking and insisting 
upon being heard upon a question which is of such vital concern to 
all his constituents. 

All the other bills before this body taken together dwarf into in- 
significance when compared with this in immediate results and far- 
reaching consequence. 

This is the only bill pending here that reaches to every homein — ~ 
the country ina manner which will make its influence immediately 
felt. It relates to taxation—not merely to the rate of tax which may 
be imposed upon the citizen, but at the same time deals with his 
ability to pay the rate when fixed. 

We are, it is hoped, at the close of the consideration of this bill, 
by our votes to indicate clearly—if we do not in fact absolutely de- 
termine—what, in a most important particular, the economic policy 
of the Government shall be. And the people in November next will 
approve or condemn our action; either they will commit our 
economic policy to the control and care of the Democratic party or 
restore the Republicans to power in the nation. Truth, justice, and 
the highest interests of the country demand that there shall be no 
paltering in a double sense, ‘‘ keeping the word of promise to the ear 
to break it to the hope.” 


ISSUE CLEARLY STATED, 


That the people may not be misled, let the issue joined between 
the majority, the Democratic side of the House, and the minority, 
the Republican side of the House, be fully and fairly stated. 

We cannot deceive ourselves if we try. Wemay attempt tode- — 
ceive the country by presenting a Janus face in the tariff plank of a 
party platform. But the end to be attained, which is admittedly 
the good of the whole country, needs not the aid of agencies of such 
doubtful honesty, and more than doubtful propriety. 

240 


Lond 


at tlie 
> 


a 
cb keer 
ae ls & Ts 


ao 
M 

. 
=? 

5 
ey 
- 

vs iy a 
SE 
r 
a 
_. 
hb 

i 

“4 
i. 
“3 

+ 

~ 

co 2 

a 

on 

; 

: 

. 

: ee 

3 

. 


bi 
a 
HP 


a ey OP eee! ae oR Sl a lS eee ee a a RP Ue 1 ee ne meh Be NN,” Ad AS De al yea Meat 7 te 
7 . _ < LS TaD | hie : e ae sabi : ers AG ‘ 
nt ss t 


BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH 241 


Let us hope, in the interest of the great cause we would serve, 
that the issue joined in the tariff planks of the national platforms 
will beso distinctly stated as to indicate that the resolution was 
drawn by patriotic statesmen, and not by time-serving and juggling 


- politicians. 


Whether the tariff needs revision is not the issue joined between. 
us. Upon that point there is no controlling difference of opinion. 


_ Whether the duty is too high upon this article or too low upon that 


is not the line upon which we divide. Whether a rate of duty yield- 
ing a much less revenue might be so adjusted as to afford all needful 
protection to our industries is not the question upon which we are 
in antagonism. These are matters of detail, and concerning which 
there might be wide diversity of opinion, not only between the polit- 
ical parties but among the members of each. These issues would. 
naturally grow out of conditions which affect the application of an 
economic policy, admitting the wisdom of the policy itself. 

_ The controversy arises out of an irreconcilable difference of opin- 
ion between the political organizations represented upon this floor 


_as to the wisdom and justice of the protective system. You assail 


it as being unsound in principle and iniquitous in its operation. We 


defend it as being alike wise in theory and beneficent in its results. 


You assert (and each speaker who has addressed the House from 
the Democratic standpoint has endeavored to maintain) that to levy 
a duty on imports, except for the purpose of raising needed revenue, - 
is at once unconstitutional, unwise, unjust, and indefensible, while 
we assert the exact reverse, insisting that not only may duties be 


' levied with reference to revenue, but with reference to the protection 


of our home industries as well, and beyond that, that such duties 
are indispensable to the development of our national resources. 

You assert, and have endeavored to prove, that the direct and in- 
evitable result of a tariff levied for the purpose of protection, and to 


the extent that it is so levied, is to exact tribute of the many for the 


benefit of the few; that the direct tendency of the system is to found 
and foster monopoly, to make the rich richer and the poor poorer; 
that all these evil results are the legitimate outgrowth of the system, 
and that being so, it is the irresistible logic of the situation that if 
you are honest, as you are, your end, aim, and deliberate purpose 
must be to destroy this system. 

What we account a blessing in the present system our Demo- 
cratic friends condemn as a curse. It follows, therefore, that the 
political parties divide on the wisdom of protection as an economic 
policy. 

In fact, we cannot deceive ourselves if we try, and I doubt if we 


— > aa se 


Ne 


tae ea eg Or De ee Be aoe gs Sees ei, JN ee a" > 2 ie ee ee eee 


949 BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. 


can deceive the country if we make the effort, as to the real obstacle 
which stands in the way of a proper and needed revision of the 
tariff. 

It will not be found in the inability of this House to revise it in 
conformity with the just and reasonable requirements of the pro- 
tective system, if that was in truth your end and aim. Nor would 
it be found in any unwillingness on our part to aid you in so doing. 
But that is not the prime object of your endeavor. The obstacle is 


found in the fact that your political creed demands that, bier z 


revising, you should seek to destroy. 


DEMOCRATIC PARTY SEEK TO DESTROY THE PROTECTIVE SYSTEM, 


The logic of your position (and you stand by it) is that you should, 
if possible, while providing for needed revenue, destroy a policy 
which you regard as unequal, unjust, and iniquitous, and which is, 
- you assert, the founder and cherisher of monopolies. 

With your convictions upon this subject you would be untrue to 
the obligations of your oaths, false to the duty devolving upon you 
as the representatives of the people, if you did not, even as you are 
doing, endeavor to tear up the iniquity by the roots, and the country 
may rest assured if you do not succeed it will not be your fault. 

It is not my purpose to discuss the details of the pending bill (that 
can be done when we come to consider it under the five-minute rule), 
- but to address myself to the main question, which involves the main- 
tenance or overthrow of the protective system. 

The people of the country do not possess the discernment for 
which I give them credit if they fail to appreciate the precise situa- 
tion presented here. They will not be misled by the cry of our 
friends upon the Democratic side of the House that they are anxious 
to revise the tariff, but that the Republicans are a stumbling block 
and rock of offense in the way. 

The first question the intelligent voter will ask himself is, ‘‘ How 
do I stand on the main proposition? Do I desire the maintenance or 
_ the destruction of the protective system?” 

He will answer that question by his vote next Novembee, He 
will say if the protective policy is beneficent it should be under 


Republican care, and not within Democratic control. Let no one 


mistake the issue. Let no one on this side suppose for a moment 
that our battle with the Democratic party is over the mere matter of 
adjusting the tariff with reference to the protection needed. This is 

a matter of detail. Our contest is to maintain the system against 
their studied efforts to eos it. The details we will settle after- 
wards. = aoe 


Seek bie a 


US uw ee tar AE aie i a le ae a Soh RA Ie pone v eas Bs isan i BF ag Et apie ce Fiaeee AF AoE Sy FR MN red et ok SENS a, ameelaie, Se’ 
, ¢ - Aa - Prot BY im TPP z ~P ‘s i’ 


athgs 


~ 


Res. - BENTAMIN BUTTER WORTH, 243 


It is interesting to note with what adroitness our friends on the 
other side endeavor to divert the attention of the country from the 
__ real purpose which underlies and is the mainspring of their effort; as 
if the political ways parted when we come to consider the duty on 
rice, the duty upon sugar, or upon glass. 

This pretended revision is the Trojan horse by means of which 
you hope to gain admission to our camp. 

.L ask you, I ask the country, if it is in the logic of the situation 
that you can revise, except to destroy. Will you seek to make 
strong or preserve in health that which you say should not exist at 
all? 

If it should be destroyed, the work of so-called revision has been 
committed to those who will rejoice in the service, the Democratic ~ 
party. Ifitis to be maintained and revised with reference to the 
performance of its legitimate and proper functions, this nation should 
place (and, in my judgment, will place) the system in the care and 
keeping of the Republican party. 

I am conscious of the fact that we are discussing a dry subject. 
But we cannot be forgetful of another fact. There is not a hearth- ~ 
stone in the United States that will not be affected for good or ill by 
the passage of the Mills bill. Its passage will be a direct condemna- 
tion of the protective system. Its defeat will indicate not that the 
tariff is perfect, but that the Democratic party is not a fit instru- 
ment to remove its imperfections. 


‘PROTECTION DEALS WITH CONDITIONS AND IMPARTS TO COMPETITION 
THE QUALITY OF HUMANITY AND FAIR PLAY. 


Let us inquire what the proper functions of the protective system 
are, for they should not be misapprehended. 

First, let it be borne in mind that it deals with conditions and not 

with boundary lines, except as the latter mark the presence of the 
former. It does not seek to destroy competition, as is asserted, but 
attempts to impart to competition the element of humanity and fair 
play, as I shall show later on in my remarks. The just measure of 
its usefulness will not be found in the weight of shekels it has se- _ 
cured to those engaged and employed in the various industries of our © 
country. 
% Desirable as the accumulation of wealth was, and is, the protec- 
z _ tive system had, and has, a nobler mission than the development of 
t the mere physical resources ofthis nation. That development might 
have been possible under a monarchical form of government control- — 
ling and employing a race of slaves. 

In the course of this argument I desire to notice the points made 


= > 


944 BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. 


against the policy of protection by the advocates of the Mills bill. 
First, whether in its proper mission it tends to establish monopoly. 
Whether it does, in fact, levy tribute upon the many for the benefit 
of the few. Whether it does make the burden of taxation unequal. 
Whether it tends to increase the price of commodities in the market. 
And then seek to learn whether its influence has been, as we claim, 
to multiply and diversify industries, and how it produces those re- 
sults. Whether the result has been, as we assert, to build up a home 
market and to continue it and in the same connection inquire into 
the relation of the agricultural industries to those of the manufac- 
turer, and see how far the assertion that farmers are bearing more 
than their share of the public burdens are borne out by the facts. 

I wish to consider also the influences which have tended to cause 
disturbance in the ranks of wage-workers and set capital and labor 
by the ears. In connection with these inquiries I will call attention 
to the influence of the two systems in the States where they each 
bear sway, and determine the value of the philosophy by the results 
of adherence to the practice it enjoins. 

What gave rise to the protective system? - 

This House and the country need not be told that it was the pur- 
pose of our fathers, in the establishment of the government we enjoy, 
to lay the: foundation of a new order of things, which looked not 
alone to the development of the material resources of this country, 
but to the moral and intellectual growth of each individual citizen; 
in this latter growth; rather than in the development of the material 
resources of the country, our fathers recognized the true foundation 
upon which to build a nation’s greatness, and permanently secure 
the freedom and prosperity of all our people. And as a logical result 
it was their active concern to provide the opportunity for the head 
of each family to bring to his home prosperity, comfort, and happi- 
ness, the legitimate offspring of intelligent effort guided by virtue. 

In this work the fathers built even better than they knew. 

The maxims of the English law—the spirit of the English consti- 
tution wherein it was a bulwark of freedom—they adopted. But in 

their effort they kept steadily in view the fundamental idea of estab- 
lishing a government ‘‘of the people, by the people, and for the peo- 
ple.” They were conscious that the homes of a country are the 
source of its greatness and power; that as we multiply the number 
of homes where virtue and intelligence exert controlling influence 
we increase the happiness of our people, and ks sure and fast the 
pillars which uphold the state. 


ve Pie oe cies Biba PAE ae oat i cd as Sie fins 
4 Fig? 


BENJAMIN BUTTER WORTH. 245 ; | 


\ 


4 


BETTER HOMES FOR THE PEOPLE AND INCREASED HAPPINESS. 


Our fathers realized that a philosopher placed in the midst of pov- 


_ - erty and squalor will gravitate toward vice and corruption. They 


knew, and we realize in as full a sense, that as needful comforts and 
conveniences abound in a home, so are the inmates of that home 
elevated and refined, dignified and ennobled. 

Our system of Government has no higher or nobler mission than 
to multiply the number of happy homes in the United States. Can 
laws perform a better work than to place the wage-worker of my 
country above and out of the influence of those conditions in the Old 
World which in a large degree tend to make men and women mere 
beasts of burden? Cana system of political economy be justly con- 
demned which seeks to enable the man who produces the wealth of 
a nation to become, with his wife and children, the sharer in and 
partaker of the fruits of his toil? This is the mission of the protect- 
- ive system. 

. I contend that the preservation of that vetarn as an economic 
governmental policy is to-day and must be for years indispensable 
‘to the national prosperity; and that it must be preserved as a 
"system. 

Now, does it perform the service we claim for it? 

You say it imposes burdens in that it increases taxation without 
corresponding benefit. We answer that it imposes the shadow of 
‘taxation that we may enjoy the substance of substantial prosperity. 

A careful examination of the circumstances which give rise to 


_ the imposition of so-called tax as an incident of the protective policy, 


and the resulting increased ability of the citizens to pay it, will 


4 satisfy even my honored friend, the chairman of the Committee on 
_ Ways and Means (and that would seem to reach the case and con- 
dition of my other friends from Kentucky, Tennessee, and Arkan- 


sas) of the wisdom and justice of the policy. 

With great respect I submit to those honorable gentlemen that 
they stop their investigation when they have viewed what they 
regard as the burden of tax imposed by the tariff. | 

They seem not to consider the increased ability to pay, which re- 
sults from the influence of the trade regulation of which the alleged 
tax is an incident. 

If it is admitted, as claimed, that the system imposes taxes, the 
answer is that such a tax is in the nature of an investment, the re- 
_ sulting profit being such as each year to repay with usury the capi- 

tal invested. 
; If I am right in this, can you successfully deny the wisdom and 


246 BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. 


justice of the policy which in the last analysis is but a goveramental 


business venture in the interests of all our people? The issue joined — | 


between us is as to whether we shall change our business method. 


An inseparable attendant on our present governmental business — 


policy involves the imposition of duties levied for protection. And 


I repeat that under our system these duties are levied as plain 
business investment and with confidence that the capital willbe re- 


turned to each citizen with usury. 


PROTECTIVE TARIFF NOT A TAX, 


But is it true to say that in maintaining a protective duty we lay 
a tax upon our people? We do not, in strictness, do any such thing. 
The exact business proposition resolves itself into this: In the inter- 
ests of our people we have adopted certain regulations in restraint 
of import trade with foreign nations. If our citizens trade with the 
citizens of those nations they do it under and in accordance with the 
regulations prescribed. These laws of trade and commerce in their 
operation have two objects in view: one, to raise the revenue to de- 
fray the expenses of the Government; the other, to so regulate the 


admission of foreign products to our home markets as to secure our ~ 


citizens against the disastrous influence of that foreign competition 
which unrestrained would greatly hinder if not absolutely prevent 
the establishment and maintenance of industrial plants in the 
United States. Ais 

We say that whatever, if any, of temporary inconvenience our 
people may suffer from these trade restrictions is more than compen- 
sated in the direct advantages which will result from their influence 
in the encouragement of productive effort among our people. We 
assert, and the proof of the correctness of the assertion is ample, 
that under the influence of this restraint of trade with foreign 
nations our own resources will be rapidly developed, our industries 
multiplied and diversified, and that the comforts and conveniences 
of life will more abound; and concurrently with all this, wages will 
be advanced, while the cost of things needful in life will be reduced. 
A home market, confessedly the most desirable, will be created, the 
industrial independence of the Republic secured, and prosperity and 
happiness come and abide with us. 

Although the results have conclusively justified every hope and 
expectation of the champions of protection, yet we have to-day, as if 
the experiment were new and untried, to stand here and defend it. 
They (I refer to these misguided Democratic brethren on the other 
side) insist that our prosperity has not been the result of the pro- 


tective system, but has come to us in spite of it. We are asked the 


e on 


at 


ni | BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. er oa 


question a thousand times each campaign, and it has been in sub- 
stance repeatedly asked during this debate:, Does protection protect? 
I propose to add my answer to those of my honored friends on this 


-.. side who have preceded me, 


FIRST PRINCIPLES UPON WHICH WE BUILD. 


First, let us agree on certain admitted facts and business proposi- 


tions which are so self-evident as to be properly ranked among the 


axioms which guide the business world in the prosecution of its 
various ventures. 

The safety and permanent endurance of a nation rest in largest 
measure upon the intelligence and virtue of its citizens. 

That country is most independent which is possessed of the 
greatest supply of the things needful in peace and essential in war. 

That economic policy is best which utilizes in the highest degree 
the widest range of material resources, and. all the powers and 


faculties of the human mind. 


The business propositions may be stated thus: 
Manufacturing plants could not be established without capital. 


Capital will not seek investment without reasonable hope of adequate 


return. 

Both capital and plants were essential to the procurement and 
employment of skilled workmen, and all these are together the 
foundation upon which must rest prosperous trade and commerce, 
since they furnish the source and supply of that which is the subject- 


| 3 matter of both. 


Capital will protect itself, even if it has to leave the workmen in 


idleness and consequent destitution. 


In a contest with workmen, capital has the advantage. This is 


__ certain, and for the reason that capital can wait longer for a dividend 
_ than labor can for a breakfast. 


_I want to supplement these cold business maxims by a few others 
that are leavened with the humane and Christian spirit of our free 


institutions. One is that labor should have its full and equal 


distributive share in the profit resulting from its joint effort with 
capital. 
To authorize or permit a condition or system which would compel 


capital either to withdraw from the field of competition or withhold 


from labor its due is alike inhuman and directly at war with sound 
public policy. I shall maintain that the protective system is 
designed to, and in its operation does, avoid the evils we would shun 


Band multiply the blessings to which we would attain, 


EIEN Cate Sp bie EN Rutt Pf Sp ORO Aart Ra RS ara ei LN PN te. j 
¥ ay jf wee! Kak 7 ¥. 


948 : BENJAMIN BUTTER WORTH. 


DOES PROTECTION PROTECT, AND HOW ? 


Does protection protect? Palpably it so regulates trade and com- 
merce with foreign nations as to shield our industrial enterprises from 
the destructive influence of conditions beyond the sea, in the pres- 
ence of which the healthful growth of the industrial arts in our 
midst would have been impossible, and for reasons so obvious and so 
frequently cited on this floor that to repeat them would seem need- 
less. They relate to the character of the competition. 

Does protection multiply our industries? No, not directly; but 
its influence is the parent of conditions which give rise to the multi- 
plication of our industries. It is the immediate cause and source of 
multiplication and diversification eh industry. Just how, I will 
state in a moment. | 

By multiplication of industries we mean the creation of those that 
are new; such as the creation of a new method of performing a given 
labor, as in making horseshoes by machinery instead of by hand; 
printing by the use of the power-press instead of by hand; in the use 

of cyclones to reduce and pulverize substances instead of using a 
mortar of stone or iron crushers. In these and other instances we 
manufacture the machines to do the work instead of doing the work 
itself with our hands. And these instrumentalities are the product 
of new industries in all the mechanical arts. 
ge; And in the invention and production in the arts of these new ma- 
chines and devices our industries are multiplied and diversified in- 
definitely, and, as a result, employmentis given to vast numbers of 
men, women, and youths, who at once create and supply a home 
market. 

All this Mr. Calhoun, in 1816, standing in his place upon this floor 
as the champion of the protective system, with prophetic vision saw 
and distinctly pointed out to the House and the country. I shall re- 
fer to his evidence later on in my remarks. 

Now, I want the attention of my distinguished friend from Texas, 
with whom I have had many interesting talks as to the source of the 
multiplication of our industries. 

I have on previous occasions called the attention of this House 
and the country to the influence of the inventive genius of our people 
upon its industrial development. — 

I have said, and do still maintain, that in that inventive genius 
will be found the germ of our unequaled industrial prosperity. And 
just at this point I anticipate the question of my friend, the gentle- 
man from Texas [Mr. Mills], who has in his bill placed the ax at the 
root of the tree of protection, He will ask me, if the multiplication 


BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. 949 


of our industries is so largely due to the genius of invention, ‘‘ Why 
do you give protection the credit for it and continue the policy?” — 
The idea being that since invention multiplies and diversifies our in- 


 dustries, and the letters patent which for a term of years vest in the 


inventor and his assigns the exclusive ownership of the thing in- 


vented, and so preserves to him the exclusive right to manufacture, 
use, and sell the invention covered by the letters patent, a protective 


tariff is needless. 


On its face the point seems strong, and in the argument is well 
taken, if the scope and influence of the patent system is as broad and 
full as is supposed. 

But I assure the gentleman that a more careful investigation of 
the character of our industrial growth as it rests upon the develop- 
ment of the mechanical arts will tend to greatly modify his views, if 
it does not radically change them. 

I have said what is axiomatic, that to have industrial planta we 
must have capital; to have capital there must be reasonable promise 


of adequate return from its investment, and both capital and plants 


are essential to the employment of skilled workmen. 
~ To procure and retain competent skill certain wages must be paid 
to the workmen. In this country the wages paid must be such as 
to enable the workmen to live in a manner worthy of and necessary 
to an American citizen. 

To state all this in a few words, capital will not be invested in 
new plants if the competition from foreign countries is of such char- 


acter that, to secure a profit or avoid a loss, the manufacturer must 
- either rob his workmen or quit business. As between the two alter- 


natives the American manufacturer will retire from business, or 


rather refuse to make the investment. He will not rob his wage- 


worker in order to compete with foreign rivals. The result is that, 


unless he is protected against the influence of that kind of competi- 
tion which outrages humanity to make profit, our people must 


either remain out of certain lines of industry, or, being in, retire. 


PROTECTION AND COMPETITION MULTIPLY AND DIVERSIFY INDUSTRIES. 


The influence of competition is two-fold. First, it fixes the selling 
price with relation to the cost of production; second, it stirs into 
action the inventive genius which seeks to provide a better article 
or a cheaper method of producing the old article; and each new and 


useful improvement in the art tends to one of the results mentioned, 


to wit, a better article or cheaper method. 
Thus, invention may form the base of a new industry, as the in- 
yention of the sewing-machine, a mowing-machine, a reaper and 


rc br Hepa tae a PS SEN er eR i TOR a Ce mS ce en ‘- or ter a ee OS Me ks 
a i peice aS aM TENT Ur LN Peds hte Heo si ve sat cles 
a - ; A ae) eS ee, re 


250 : " pexyausy BUTTERWORTH. 


mower, and the like. These are absolutely new industries, and may — 


become, by virtue of letters patent issued to the inventor, the exclu- 


sive property for a term of years of the inventor. 

And right here my friend asks me what need there is of a pro- 
tective system, since the multiplication of industries depends upon 
the inventive genius and the thing invented becomes the exclusive 
property of the inventor. Is not the letters patent sufficient pro- 
tection ? 

I answer, No; and will state succinctly the reason. If my friends 
will reflect a moment they will observe that nineteen out of every 


twenty of the improvements for which letters patent are issued do 


not evidence the creation of what I have described as a new art, but 
cover some improvement in the art. That is, the improvement is 
supplemental and tributary to the invention which lies at the base 
of the art. 

To illustrate: An impr ovement i in the shuttle used in the sewing- — 
machine, valuable and useful as it may be when used in the ma- | 
chine, is of little consequence to the inventor or manufacturer if he 
finds it impossible profitably to make the machine itself. 

An improvement in the device for working a sickle on a mowing 
machine is unimportant to a manufacturer if he cannot make the 
machine of which the improvement is but a supplemental adjunct. _ 

There are in one sense few new industrial arts. There are many ~ 
new and useful improved devices used in the arts—improvements of 
greater or less consequence in the machines and implements which 
form the base of a particular art. a 

It follows that to protect the improvements in a given art you 
must protect our manufacturers in the production of the implement, _ 
machine, or device in connection with which such improvements 
are used. These improvements are in many, I may say in most, in- 
stances compared to the importance of the machine itself in a large 
measure inconsequential, but still mark desirable and substantial 
progressive development, and supply better and more ample facili- 
ties in the conduct of human affairs, and these improvements and 
agencies have placed innumerable articles on the free-list. Our pro- 
tective system protects the industrial arts which form the base upon — 
which the improvements given to the world by inventive genius are 
grafts. : 

They are the foundation; these later important and supplemental 
improvements in part the superstructure. 

So it occurs that by protecting the art, competition in our own 
country results, inventive genius is stirred into action, and our in- 
dustries enlarged and multiplied, Thus the conditions to which our 


TY re A ae tS Cato yak op ha ig wa a nc OMS gee a Rca a BNL a ea OR 
¥ eg ate a es by, ee ee oa at ~ q ‘ 


- BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH get 


friends on the other side would attain will be soonest reached by pur- 
suing the even tenor of our way along the highway of protection. 
‘ The protective system upholds the art, the inventive genius 
~ perfects and completes it. Its influence is in a measure hidden, but 
-it is none the less potent and far-reaching. Destroy the protective 
system and you destroy that which depends upon it. ‘‘ You take 
my house when you take the prop that doth sustain my house; you 
take my life when you do take the means whereby I live.” 

But let us turn and scan the results which should approve or con- 
demn the protective system. Itis familiar to us all that when the 
fathers were seeking to determine what the economic policy of the 
Government should be, then, as to-day, free trade and protection, as 
distinct economic systems, were struggling for supremacy. With 
reference to the protracted contest, I assert that if there was reason 
at any time during the history of this Republic which justified the 

- levying of a duty for protection, so long as that reason exists so long 
is the system itself defensible. That is logical, and the soundness of 
the proposition will not be questioned. 

Can any intelligent mortal entertain a doubt that a protective 
tariff was indispensable to the establishment and growth of our in- 
- "dustries and the development of the resources of the notion in that 
| which was essential to the freedom, independence, prosperity, and 

happiness of our people? If there is a doubter in the face of the tes- 
-  timony and experience of the fathers, supplemented by our own, he 

suffers from a weakness that is congenital, and no argument sub- 

-_ mitted here can influence his action. 

Stating the proposition in another form, let me assert that which 

cannot be gainsaid: that if for reasons sufficient in the early history 

of the Republic a protective policy was judicious and humane the ~ 

game system must be equally wise, just, and humane to-day if the 

reasons still obtain which approved it a century ago. There is no 

escape from this. If our fathers, for good reason, found it necessary, 

as confessedly they did, during the earlier period of the existence of 

the Republic, to invoke the aid and shield of the protective system, 

unless the reason no longer exists, the system which rests upon that 

: reason, or upon the same or like conditions, should still be main- 
‘ tained. — 


pol 


as CONDITIONS THAT GAVE RISE TO THE PROTECTIVE SYSTEM. 


Now let me recur to the conditions which gave rise to this sys 
tem of protection, not because it is essential to the argument ad- 
dressed to you, but because it may be useful to the larger audience 


= 


Br Sie A ie, en BME Eas ay Sr RON a CRE: Ook ee Ree ne ee 
252 | BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. 


Our fathers found our country possessed of abundance of material 
exhaustless in quantity, excellent in quality, and infinite in variety. 
Then, as now, even in our own markets, we had the world for com- 
petitors. In the face of competition then the young Republic lacked 
established plants, lacked the capital to establish them, was wanting 
in skilled workmen. They found also that American freemen must 
enter the field as competitors of toilers on the other side, the result 
of whose efforts barely enabled them to exist. 

At that time, in the midst of hard lines, this latter factor in the 
problem (I refer to wages), which has since become the controlling 
one, was not so thoroughly considerod; not because our ancestors 
were less humane or less conside:te of the rights and claims of the 
skilled artisans, mechanics, and wov’kmen of their own country, but 
the question itself was not so important thenasnow. The wage 
was the smaller factor in the problem of competition then; it is the 
largest and the controlling factor in the cconomic problem to-day. 

Against the hard conditions I have mentioned the young nation 
entered the lists to compete for the poor favor of selling in our own 
markets and to our own people. Men shen, as now, would exer- 
cise their right to buy where they could buy cheapest and sell 
where they could realize the largest price. There is no sentiment 
in trade. We will buy an English or a German coat for $10 in pref- 
erence to paying $12 or $15 to our own countrymen for the same ar- 
ticle, though our industries perish. Buying and selling is not mat- 
ter of sentiment, but matter of business. 

It was clear that the result must be that if the Old Wvurld, with 
its established plants and boundless resources in capital, its skilled 
and cunning workmen, could enter the markets of the United States 
without the restraint of a duty imposed to regulate trade, our peo- 
ple would be unable to compete with the producers on the other 
side, even in our home market. That this was so, and is so to-day, 
is too clear to need argument. It was the experience of the United | 
States immediately after the war of 1812, when England flooded our 
markets with goods of every kind, and to such an extent and at 
such low prices that the mills, shops, and factories upon this side 
stood idle. In the presence of such competition it could not be 
_ otherwise. 

The necessity for providing against the baneful influence of this 
competition which paralyzed our industries, and at last tended ta 
impoverish and humiliate our workmen and leave us helpless and 
prostrate in the field of industrial effort, was apparent to the men 
of that day who controlled the affairs of this nation. 


Pais 


BENJAMIN BUTTHRWORTL 953 


MR. CALHOUN ONCE THE CHAMPION OF PROTECTION. 
It was then that Mr. Calhoun, the representative of South Caro- 


_ Kina, appeared upon this floor as the earnest and able champion of 
_ the protective system. He found the agricultural interests of hisown 
State suffering in competition with India, and the fact was cited by 
agentleman speaking of that competition, that it was in vain for 


our country to successfully grow cotton and weave cotton fabrics in 


‘ competition with India where the raw material was 4 pence a pound 
- and the wages of the, laborer in weaving 4 pence a day. 


It will be remembered that not many years prior to that time 


Whitney had invented the cotton-gin, and upon the other side the 


‘Ligeti th ae 
t 


SE a aM i al le eae lid ee a 


5.42 


spinning-jenny and the power-loom had been given to the world 


by the genius of English operatives, and these agencies, going hand 


in hand, gave a new impetus to the growth of cotton, and under the 


influence of that new impetus all the Southern fields became white 


with the harvest: 

. Against the destructive influence of competition with India, Mr. 
Calhoun, standing in his place in the House of Representatives, 
advocated the imposition of a protective tariff; and a protective 


_ tariff was levied upon goods imported from the other side. 


One item in that schedule levied a duty of 3 cents a pound on 
cotton, which was about 75 per cent. of the cost of its production by 
their Indian competitor. 
=f eall the attention of my honorable friend from South Carolina, 
the worthy successor of Mr. Calhoun, to the language of the. latter, 


? when he stood as one €f the foremost champions of the policy which 
his successors upon this floor so earnestly condemn and seek so 
eagerly to destroy. 


Then Mr. Calhoun was not dealing with abstract philosophy, but 


was evolving a system for himself from existing conditions and facts, 
~which refused to be ignored. 


Speaking upon the tariff bill in 1816, Mr. Calhoun, deprecating 


the evils which would attend upon its defeat, said: 


When our manufactories are grown to a certain perfection, as they soon 


will be under the fostering care of the Government, we will no longer expe. 


rience these evils. [Evils resulting from this unequal competition.] The 


farmer will find a ready market for his surplus, and what is of equal conse. 


quence, a certain and cheap supply of all his wants. 


It is interesting to observe that South Carolina, which leads the 
van in opposition to the protective system, did not always adopt this 


view. AsI have before said, her le-din~ statesmen in 1816 recog- 


soy chal 
ys 


pen as Pee. 1 hi PAN. tay tee SADT 
: Ry em fy 


SORA Or BENJAMIN BUTTER WORTH. 


nized the importance of protecting, in a radical manner, the indus 


tries of South Carolina. 


The few struggling cotton-mills of New England in the early part 
of this century found it cheaper to buy India cotton than to buy that — 
produced in the Carolinas, and under the operation of that law which ~ 


our friends upon the other side so constantly invoke—the right to ~ 
buy where we can buy cheapest—the mill-owners of New England - 
bought India cotton, and our merchants purchased India cotton 


fabrics. 


There could hardly be a complaint in the Carolinas that they did — 


not have cheap labor; but cheap as their labor was, the labor of — 


India was still cheaper. The result was that New England merchant- 
men and English vessels brought from India cotton to supply New 
England mills and cotton goods to supply the American market. At 
that time certain Representatives from New England talked persua- 
sively against an import duty, but placed their opposition on the 
ground of its injurious effects upon the India shipping interest, in 


which New England then employed forty ships. It was but a few — 


years until our friends from south of the Potomac had gained and 
held the coign of vantage against the producers of cotton through- 


out the nations of the world, and strangely enough, after having first 7 
enjoyed the blessings of a protective system and in the midst of — 


their own flourishing condition, turned to deny to the struggling in- 


dustries of the other States the protection indispensalie to their 
establishment and growth. 


The cultivation of cotton becoming independent of all competition, — 


the Southern statesmen turned from the championship of that in- 
dustry to defend the peculiar system of labor employed in its prose- 


cution, and from that day slavery and free trade established and 
maintained an offensive and defensive alliance and waged relentless — 
war upon the protective policy. They were enabled to—as indeed ~ 


they did in a large degree—dominate the country, and our economic 
policy oscillated between free trade and protection, and our indus- 
tries had a desperate struggle for existence; and every spurt of suc- 


cess which came to them under the influence of war or newly-dis- 


covered gold mines was, by our free-trade friends, accounted to be 

the direct result of progress in the direction of free trade. __ 
Tam aware that it will be said that if conditions warranted a pro- 

tective tariff in an early period, it cannot be made to appear that 


such conditions exist to-day, and, the reason ceasing, the rule should | 


cease with it. 


I challenge the correctness of the assertion that there has been 


~ é, 
4 
‘ : <e 
. Sa 
Pegs. Sa 


“ Mb: 
$ hey 


RR eee Ueda LS oh ct age: DUT i Bi ag VOR le LER My aca as DiS MM ka de Pec a a 


BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. ORR 


such change in our condition as to render the protective system of 
to-day defenseless. 


Is A PROTECTIVE TARIFF NECESSARY TO-DAY ? 


_ And now I desire to consider for a moment the changed conditions 
to the extent that there has been change, so as to determine whether 
in point of fact, admitting that a protective tariff was desirable in 
the early history of the Republic, it, on account of the alleged 
changed conditions, should be condemned to-day. 

Without reviewing the history of our progress, we admit that we 
no longer are at the disadvantage of lacking established plants, nor 
do we lack capital; and it is but justice to my countrymen to say 
that as artisans, mechanics, and skilled workmen they are unsur- 
passed in the world. These three factors are eliminated from the 
industrial problem, but there remains still the fourth, the most im- 
portant and controlling factor to-day; one that was inconsequential 


then. The plants are here, the capital is here, the skilled workmen 


are here, but the starvation wages are not here and in God’s provi- 
dence never will be here if the Republican party shall write the laws: 
of the land. [Applause.] 


_ !' "The difference in wages at the beginning of the century was unim- 


portant. The rates of duty were relatively as high then as they are 
now. The difference in wages paid in the Old World and upon this 


- gide was. not radically different at the organization of our Govern- 
- ment, and for some years afterwards; nor would they have been 


different to-day if the economic policy which controlled for a term of 


years, and which is seeking to control in this House to-day, had con- 


tinued to bear sway. 
In the prosperity upon the other side, the wage-worker—the pro- 


; ducer, if you please—was not permitted adequately to share. 


In most of the countries there during the years that have elapsed, 
notwithstanding his larger contribution in producing results, his 
wages have not been materially advanced; and it is proper to say 
just here that he was not and is not yet a part and parcel of the gov- 
ernment. He had not the political power to redress his wrongs and 
vindicate his rights. Revolution was his only remedy. 

Now mark the difference. Under the beneficent influence of our 
Government, of which every citizen is a part, the progress made in 
industrial development attests the presence in the homes of the work- 
men of the land better conditions and influences that are ennobling 
and refining. 

They find opportunity for increased comforts in the fact that the 
prices of things needful in life haye been constantly reduced, while 


ss re See oa Sr eye OE gee ee 


956 BENT AMIN BUTTER WORTH. 


the rate of wages paid has been constantly advanced, mounting up _ 
25, 50, 75, 100, and in many instances 300 per cent. above what they 
were when the economic philosophy of our Democratic friends held se 
sway in the Government. 

And, I repeat, capital, established plants, and skilled workman- 
whip are not to-day the controlling factors in the industrial problem. 

With us the paramount question is, shall those who contribute to 
yur prosperity by their labor, the wage-workers, be remitted to the 
condition of those upon the other side of the water, or shall they 
sontinue to share, as now, in the profits resulting from a union of — 
tapital with labor in the field of productive effort? . 

Doubtless nine out of ten of the communications received by gen- 
tlemen upon this floor from their constituents protesting against the 
assault in the Mills bill upon the industries in which those constitu- - 
ents are employed refer to the difference in cost of production 
between their shops, mills, or factories and the cost of similar articles 
imported from foreign countries as due to the increased wages paid ~ 
in the United States. In the production of the greater part of the 
output of our manufacturing establishments labor contributes the 
larger share; such contribution ranging from 10 to over 99 per cent, — 

There are industries which employ many skilled workmen in 
which 40 cents’ worth of material, after being manipulated by the 
skilled mechanic and passes from his hands a finished product, sells 
in the market for as much as $80. This is, of course, an exceptional 
case, but not so exceptional or extreme as many suppose. But I use 
it as an illustration, because it marks so palpably the point I wish to 
make touching the influence of foreign competition with our own 
skilled labor. The industry I referred to is the manufacture of the 
small screws and springs used in making watches. 

In that industry upon the other side the wages paid range below 
40 per cent. of what is paid the skilled mechanic in the United States 
engaged in the same employment. 

It would hardly be claimed in the instance cited that a duty of 10, 
20, 80, or 50 per cent. would correct the inequality between our home 
manufactures and their foreign competitors. 


PROTECTIVE SYSTEM ESSENTIAL TO LABOR. 


I have studied with care to ascertain the per cent. that labor con- 
tributes in the production of the articles supplied by our leading in- 
dustries, and am satisfied that the difference which obtains between 
the per cent. apportioned to labor here is so much greater than that 
which is accorded to labor upon the other side that a carefully de- 
vised protective tariff is indispensable to the preservation of ourin- — 


i es eer wy tes eee 


RO ne Le ee ee eee aa 
% 


BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. SAOBY? 


dustrial enterprises if the rights of workmen here are fairly consid- 
ered and honestly provided for. 
It is clear that we cannot prevent employers in foreign countries 


- from levying unjust and cruel exactions upon their employés. They 


‘may, if they will, coin money of the bone and muscle of those who 


labor for them; but we can provide against the destructive influence 
of such competition upon our own workmen by excluding foreign 
goods from our market, except upon terms which shall keep far 
from us the conditions which are the curse that rests upon the 
industrial classes of the Old World. 

The various objections to the protective system urged by our 
friends upon the other side have been fully met by gentlemen who 
have preceded me. The proposition that the cost to the consumer in 
the United States is increased in exact proportion to the duty levied 


has been shown over and over again by my associates to be alike un- | 


true in fact and absurd. There is still less justice and truth in 
claiming that the amount levied for the purpose of protection is so 


much taken from the consumer and placed in the pocket of the 


~ manufacturer. 


If an article costs a dollar in Italy, and by reason of a higher rate 
of wages here it costs a dollar and twenty-five cents, and the expense 


of placing the Italian article upon our market is 5 cents, and the duty 


imposed by our Goverment is 20 cents, is it not something worse than 
folly to claim that that duty of 20 cents goes into the pocket of the 
manufacturer as profit? It does go directly into the pocket of the 
wage-worker, and represents the difference in compensation between 


_the amount paid the workmen here and in Italy. 


Does the protective duty increase the cost to the consumer? And 


if so, for how long? In the first instance the cost of an article may 


be temporarily increased. It is not always so, but that is the philos- 
ophy of the situation. Granting, for the sake of the argument, that 
the cost is temporarily increased, does the end justify the means? 
Is it exceptional to practice self-denial and rigid economy this year 
in order that prosperity may abound the next? Is it not the practice 
of every-day life when in hard lines to suffer inconvenience to-day to 
secure the better condition to-morrow? Following swiftly on the 
heels of this inconvenience of to-day we have, as compensation, per- 
manently reduced prices and increased prosperity as lasting as the 
influence to which it is due. : 

The experience of this nation abundantly attests that the tempor- 
ary disadvantage resulting from the self-denial practiced, and which 
is self-imposed, compared with the consequent advantage pb is 
born of that self- denial, is absolutely inconsequential. 


258 BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. 


TARIFF NOT AN ALLY OF TRUSTS AND COMBINES, 


There has been during this debate an earnest endeavor to link 
the creation of trusts, syndicates, and combines to the protective 
policy and make it responsible for the existence of these ulcers upon 
the body-politic. They have no proper relation to each other, nor is 


either dependent upon the other, and if it shall appear that the tariff _ 


is in any instance the prop and support to any trust or ‘‘ combine” 


formed to strangle and control the just and wholesome influences of 
the law of supply and demand, let that stay to the iniquity be torn 
away at once! 

No man upon this floor shall be before me in condemnation of 
these organizations. I do not hesitate for one moment toassert that 
the most serious menace to republican institutions in this country 
will be found in the power and influence of aggregated capital and 
the pretentious insolence of overgrown wealth. And I am not alone 
upon this floor in the conviction that unless they are speedly throttled 
they will have upon the throat of the Republic so firm a grip that 
nothing short of revolution will compel them to relax their hold. 
This is strong language, but I mean every word of it. I do not stand 
here to condemn as moral monsters the individuals engaged in these 
various enterprises or organizations, for I recognize the fact that 
there is a vast deal of human nature in utilizing opportunities and 
conditions to better one’s condition, increase his wealth, and extend 
his influence; but they are none the less dangerous to the well-being 
of my country that the men interested therein are reputable citizens 
and have not violated the letter of the law of the land. 

When the bill that deals with them comes before this House, if 


the committee having it in charge can muster courage to report ity £3, 


shall bear witness of no doubtful import as to our duty. 


Recurring again to the influence of the industrial system we are 


building up, it was urged, in an earlier day, and latterly as well, that 
the growth of our manufacturing industries tended to dwarf the 
manhood of those employed in them. I dissent from that propo- 
sition. I speak now of my own country. 


INFLUENCE OF PROTECTION UPON EMPLOYES. 


Let it be remembered that with the growth of our industries the 
opportunities for increased convenience and comforts grow with 
equal pace. Let it not be forgotten that the men who work in the 
mills, factories, and shops are potent factors in this Government, and 
have a voice in declaring the law which regulates the conditions 


» % 
= 


bs 
Apt 


BS 


OM: on Ba 


ee ie Set ae ee 


¥ 
; 
: 
4 
4 


- BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. 259 


under which they labor. Their children go to school and become fa- 
miliar with the duties and obligations of the citizen, and learn what 
the proper functions of the civil government are. 

What is said as to the influence of certain employment may thdeed 
apply to the condition of operatives upon the other side, but it can 
have no application to our own fellow-citizens. 


ARTISANS AND WORKMEN OF CINCINNATI. 


The city of Cincinnati, which, with my honored colleague, General 
Brown, I have the honor to represent, is known to you as a hive of 
industry. One or two wards in my district have within their limits 
a greater number of skilled artisans and mechanics than can be 
found elsewhere in this country upon the same amount of territory. 
I challenge any State or city on earth to produce rarer mechanical 
skill or a more intelligent and prosperous people. 

These conditions are not evidenced alone in the skill and cunning 


_ shown in their several callings. It is shown in those adornments of 
‘mind and character which are inseparable from the prosperity and 


happiness that abound in their homes. 
I will engage to go with you into any shop or factory in my dis- 
trict where the workmen I have alluded to are employed and select 


aman at random, and you will not find one who cannot read the 


Constitution of his country in one or two languages, or who does not 
understand the rights it secures and the obligations it imposes. Go 
with him to his home. In that home you will find not merely the 
ordinary comforts and conveniences of life, but also the incontesta- 


7 _ ble evidence of education and refinement. Books and music will be 


found there. ‘The daughter of that household will be found not only 
equal to the discharge of the duties which pertain to housewifery, 
but taking her place at the piano she will discourse the rarest music 
from Wagner, Beethoven, and other masters in that science. Upon 
the walls you will find paintings which are the handiwork of mem- 
bers of that family. There will be found worthy example upon the 
part of the parents, and filial piety upon the part of the children. 

One other thing you will find: that the head of that family and 
the boys who come after him are intelligent and earnest advocates 
of the protective system. 

T am not willing to exchange scenes and conditions such as I have 


‘described for any that can be found where the philosophy of free 


trade bears sway and shapes the industrial policy of the people. 


960 BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. 


GOMPARE RESULTS OF FREE-TRADE PHILOSOPHY AND THE INFLUENCE 
OF PROTECTION, 


T need not cross the water for the purpose of pointing out the 
influence of the policy of free trade and all that appertains thereto, 
and that of the protective system. Our own country furnishes 
abundant evidence by which we can reach a correct and just 
conclusion. 

I propose, in no invidious spirit, but in simple justice to the 
people I represent, and in justice to the people of this whole country, 
to present to the House and to them some comparisons as to the 
progress made in the several States in everything that goes to make 
* up an enlightened and progressive civilization. 3 

There are certain States which make relentless war upon the 
protective policy, and certain other States which as constantly de- 
fend it, and are seeking to defeat the wrecking policy proposed in 
the Mills bill. 

It has been plainly intimated time and again upon this floor that 
those employed in the mills, factories, and shops of the manu- 
facturing States, and especially in New England, are in a measure 
robbed. That is not the ‘language used, but is the logic of what is 
said. I propose to ascertain how far the facts sustain the assertion 
and find where the most conclusive evidence of prosperity and cic? 
piness is to be found. 

I shall not stop to examine merely the manufacturing interests of 
the country, but will look into the condition of every industry and 
calling which has relation to the prosperity of the section where it 
is carried on. 

Our friends upon the other side have appeared especially anxious 
in regard to per cent. of wages paid. 

I hope I may be pardoned for occasionally referring to the ‘‘ Buck- 
eye” State, and certainly no gentleman upon this floor should feel 
less pride than I do in that Commonwealth. 

We can say to the East and South, ‘‘We are your children; our 
parents brought with them to Ohio the characteristics of your peo- 
ple. If we have achieved a measure of success you can rejoice at it, 
for we are your children.” 

We turn to tho West, and there we find the sons and daughters 
of Ohio, the brothers and sisters of our people. Our prosperity is 
but an evidence of the greatness and strength of the whole country. 

T recur again to the maticr of wages, and call attention of my 
friends upon the other side to the startling fact that tho ‘‘ Buckeye” 
State alone pays in wages to thc workmen employed in the manu- 


> e. SS * § FP Es be REE end Pag y 


BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. — 961- 


facturing industries prosecuted within her border $6,000,000 more 


than is paid to all the wage-workers employed in the thirteen States, 
Delaware, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, 


- Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, Tennessee, Ken- 
tucky, and Virginia. Yet these States have an aggregate population 


of nearly 15,000,000, while Ohio has a population of 3,193,000. A 
fact not less important is this: that while those States pay to those 


employed but $270 per capita, Ohio pays $333. 


The following is the showing in detail of the total wages pues in 
the States named: 


States. Wages paid.} Population. 

NTE ines C raviese a cock «ood cade cent cSe en eiel one tees ness $4,267,000 146,608 
WOR VIDOE eins Cece. cee saiciies See veU nes cawianw ees elcleedll caleweck 4,313,000 618,457 
North Carolina....... ..... FOE ar PEPE OE PO IN ce Pee ER 2,741,000 1,399,750 
South Carolina... oc. Seces ccs secs ssecescccs Sa eee te 2,836,000 995,577 
RMR aia cd gee whet apt bos Sa Cee ade anis 6 Cp cew aden ad ose dima y 5,266,000 1,546,180 
PUMCSICLPL OMIT Ch easier cg ie cioe cies ours olatiara pieid occ eBvetis @ abies DieMaTS cig 1,271,0 269,493 
PRUNTIONB ee iat ek oN otels Ee Ley dl. fonts epic eas obs ke Csieilaeatide'. 2,501,000 1,262,505 
PMR IR MAII EU eats aiat cobs vecioce ti meh cca faves de cia cbies's Cues oe 1,193,000 1,131,597 
AS ESIAID ot eee Tee bh < oS oivis aie laiw'n 2:0 CRleTe egies clan staltodideleis ed eilelsaicee Cait 4,360,000 939,946 
ob DOXAS% isc.s.00i0 Me rate eo rad oe ow ai aicknin SAGE oe tcious Biters ina niale, Seiatacki eras wept 3,343,000 1,591,749 
PITTS AO Os etiaticacs Si gisie soit Uibcle soars se Lemon eee eeice Canes tate wes 5,255,000 1,542,359 
NGRTPR ATC ¢ ores vers Fiala ald <ayery wis © Gaye Gills hore Foeceeicals Way ecacmemee ef saigd cs 6 11, 658, 000 1,648,690 
Re Peers caste u alts sel ova neveret tess 02 cas yscesucn’s 7, 425, 000 1,512,565 
PIRGH AR Hae PAL Clnra es sisi os 6 ria sata stare 2a ei aici SE eles ag clk are t'Seieie'sssc ees 56,419,000 14,591,475 


Ohi0.....---s.s000e- cee ene renee eecceete eter st enens tee eeeesceee es 62,104,000 3,198,062 


I am aware that honorable gentlemen will answer, ‘‘But the 


.. States you mention are not manufacturing States.” So it would 


seem from the showing, but whose fault is it that they are not 
manufacturing States? Can you give any good and sufficient reason 
why the iron has slept in your mountains undisturbed during the 
last century ? 

Why does your coal remain in the hills undug ? 

Why is it that the water in your rivers runs listlessly to the sea, 
bearing upon its bosom little commerce and turning no wheel of in- 
dustry ? 

Is it our fault that the waters of the James, the Alabama, the 
Cumberland, and the Kentucky do not turn as many wheels of in- 
dustry as the waters of the Connecticut and the Merrimac, and those 
which flow in the rivers of Pennsylvania, Ohio, and the West? 


[Applause. ] 
It is not because nature has not been prodial in giving to you 


all the resources in raw material essential to great industrial prog- 


ress. The reason must be found in your adherence to that philoso- 


Deo BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. 


phy which is evolved from ideal Coninons and hypothetical facts, 
and shuts its eyes to accomplished results. 

But, you say, the same economic system obtained in all the States. 

That is true in theory, but not true in practical experience. 

The States where the philosophy of free trade was supreme have 
not recovered from the paralysis resulting from its influence, and 
the course and conduct of the adherents to that philosophy have 
been in strict accord with its teachings. 

The result is before us. That paralysis which excluded manu- 
facturing from the States mentioned antedates the war, and its in- 
fluence lingers there still, but let us hope will give place in the near 
future to a more healthful condition, the result of a wiser economic 
policy. 

The object-lessons I place before. you to-day should be ccnclusive 
alike against your philosophy and your practice. [Applause. | 

I call attention now to the cities of the Union where various in- 
dustries are carried on, and also to the States as a whole, toascertain 
the ratio of persons employed and the rate of wages paid per capita. 
Here is the exhibit. 

The comparison is between several cities to which I now call at- 
tention: 


CINCINNATI. 
RO CEPA TOD) ic ots ia tareinte sau dior’ pV aaa) go ad lg i. otal loues v els va eve ree eae 256,000 
Total number of persons employed in manufacturing industries 54,580 
WAC es oie Slais GA oie Ale alge cis tue Stele eR aalis ies a ape Saletan staat iamnte 39,000 
Hemales.. oo ve. ISIE xisg woecmsanel a, w Soba) oimaet seattle meets Winer ie ias ate een 10,495 
POURS s ce oi ere Cbaca pkio a areas Gre-iernlote inelary, oopractea ners «age. 4 aieiene ete ee 5,085 
POMEL SURES TIQIC Son %o ci onic. nee nama od W mie Wee myn elt eiaieiet ole © gpa veer $19,554, 000.00 
BACALL Go cd coach wage sear clas Whe eoghedes ofc Wars eit aang ace aee Py Ay $358.50 

Ratio of employed to population, 1 in every 4. 

CHARLESTON. 
MP PCLA GION (.0/5kSs eicyie-wiele Slate wey stan Weal aete nee cet tale» ip inc Smreaete 49,984 
Total number of persons employed in manufacturing ‘ndustr ies 2,146 
gee ce 2 Le Me caution aterdle NTE OE MOe weceicust ate, bee ge halos ofa 1,788 
PEMGG Hs cs ce Fale a Sica ote ee GBs Gig/ata ihe tot ole Ualiarane! anes Adolenea rap 150 
PRS Ask SS iet Soa bae Fea pk BND Bee a wae eg lene ada te miape ies Wee 208 
PE GUN Wy OS ORL: fs o5 tts ‘sig, 51a 0 MRNA SL iw, Orlibre OREN SHEDS fon 2 $669,000.00 
Per wapita. <s5.. Leos ¢ UR bag RLY Heme Hae eR ee Feseeree $311.08 


Ratio of employed to population, 1 in 28. 


LYNN, MASS. 
POPUIBHON. cc s ou ae eos aw op eed a iin ds Male hae ate ve wv Sb ort ote 31,050 
Total number employed.,.,,..-+-+e.+++0 eR LION 8 Oe d Mealo anaes 12,420 


Ys eae 


BENJAMIN BUIVERWORTH, “O65 
IRM aR) oer heey eee ro Gem on ce am way an Cah 8,894. 
EPHRLE Sei le ne Les ie ee en Ne Ch ee ea es wok c as cle po ben as 3,489 
EMIS ere Nia od cout tk Woe Go MITE SoM OE og aA cg NSA TS 37 
Ota Wares Pad css. eR eT ls SP are sae Ce ah ge ge $5,838,000. 00 


PELECRDIN Toc PACE cae wea ita toliS eae tele ied bale hikes $469.00 
Ratio of employed to population, 1 out of every 24. 


LOWELL, MASS. 


RAPPER SE fo ace aint cies, oo) oki «6 ce sie oe Mi eves wnas pele? « ie : 59,475 
Mes or HetpCMIDlOV CU, .<ps eda ccn cee ea oars a esas eeiewe ae ei 20,089 
Mee eee Nee oT ioe emt cy a ale errata walle ol pe sia oR ies 9,218 
RCN tre a cre OR ale Coals ol oe ra. So Sea Ye ark ee 6.0 VS hale oleae Sw 9,503 
ily ena AG Seana sie cll eNrpielg «Gk VANS leg ay she's ok oars 1,318 
‘Total wages paid. . Ree RC eee Se an ORE a hg otha a ware Gee oe $5, 997,000. 00 
EMME Pte Goat eN tray ee vie ane tig ale vars pach ec eee eho e eae $294.20 


Ratio of employed to population, a little over 1 in 3. 


: CHICAGO, ILL. 

Me awiOths mene Nd POST RRP) Sie Sines ag, 503,000 
Poet NuMpEY-CM ployed fy vn bev od cere ce che 79,414 
Reis Paid 2-0 e, sie: pveials Oee.g eiaiy. winie wale ud AUER EGE AER pa DRI IRM 5 ABP 62,431 
ITM eee oh. eis al Swe « ss ahead ob se oc rele a bic Wid he iw tre Gade aedlowe Kuipers 12,185 
REED UIN re arte ete ad oo PU Lec aiule cs Gres ky Oe aie's CL Ore wikis oes. e oP ol bie 4,798 
mM eS TIALS it cae COPE OE o's wg oy a's a dais w Fak ows Se $34,653, 462.00 
MO Me ei, Pea ee Sere obs Vesa ite awn coeee es $436.30 


Ratio of employed to SUonldeon: 1 in 6, 


8ST. LOUIS, MO. 


MRM OIE e's letok wil tstatwe siete es odo nek eek w cueu sas eeeneks 351,000 
eres UDOT CHIP IOY CC iia or et mos bogs idle Weld dicled yg eid bid sive dele se 41,825 
MPM PS Sartiae Gs Spa aaeeicke tiaras oRON Cs 0 o.u's e Kivwe cece ceual 33,980 — 
BRE, OU se ie hades i AUR: tlie niiea eee esichvees oe Geetha 4,761 
UME P ETI i ai bel ars gals eek, de WN Sh is Bobs CH RARER Aly OE wos Rpely mika Bats 3,084 
CME ZOS DIDI 2 foi cikc ov uiplee e's oe We Se eres Seidel taeiesiele v6 6s ease $17, 743,532.00 
RAL Sy at te eels x oeie Hae oe BE SEER bee SE ese dene hoe e Maes $424, 45 


Ratio of employed to population, 1 in 8, 


BOSTON, MASS. 


NR RIRTEI ELIT ya Tae 20, Seles ok Pink gS SAC x 3m bie elena aldo Vee s eo 32868, 006 
abe PUI DEE CM DOVE dg «.ohacyis Vetwic crete Orem esas s Gave aees Rate 59,213 
RSE ote ase utc aie a Case Dene 9g alain ohp aeaRn Wath al tite w ewete wile 89,810 
OMAR Re tira els ac il clase sie eagle tre ewelehe den kee nae 18,150 
Re ae Meant acter hen iva Gls tC os tse! Si ooh ae Pints bine a bee. 0 ee 1,258 

MRIPIOW ALES DUG ochre Cee wy fy cies cv tues poe wks cae ese vies . -$24,924,000.00 

MReEME TIEN ha dea Ne nie CORK Ghee Me vlcc'ee « CRD he $421.75 


Ratio of employed to population, 1 in 6, 


264 BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. 
“PHILADELPHIA, PA. ; 

POPULATIONS Es. op he Ae Cae Re OIE Se ws Selec pels agitate 6 ae “ 868,000 
Fotal- num ber employed: fies SCNT. eV css alpen oat or a ele Re ee 185,527 
EIB avr erck- ere. caultidgiominten ences kaa ya eta heresies eee Sts oe 113,025 
PUG BLOR ea su Ga cte win tae SO eee s Ce be SER SEER GEIR OS ema oman - §6,818 
VOUS wate kee DS OR ERI TE PELE SS FONDS OV A ee 15,684 
MAL WATS DAIL ss U odae irs Sor a coed eee coda te er tre .. . «664,265,000 00 
CPCCA es carer c's oe ayy Wintec a os Cy wu ton Seance are anee errr $340.75 


Ratio of employed to population, 1 in 4. 


. LAWRENCE, MASS. 
ROM MtOH ch c's tatu ocieete ease bs Lek g areas EEE pau Bebe Sites 89,151 


seo number Of persons CMpPloyed:, .. is. vase dees oa cis es cleleelt 16,719 
EMBL Ae cag hts gine cis ork Sie te mews Aree EN oS one 0 Oleh oa Cla ate we ae 7,819 
PPOMAICR sip ois ba Sale Meee bes 8 ib 6 Rew ae ck WO below sn la boolee aaa 7,908 
POROIES Fo og oN 4 SEE TEE TES ES OE RGN THe Ae he UT A NSA Cass Ciale elptoee ies 992 
OL Wares DAI oyas tea ys a8 2 YEAS Sl Se eek ah ace eke aus PaAKhs hee $5,549,000.00 
i ag hy eas BRE Np ghee ea IRS GRRL CE MS rs un eee mer eRe by ate iol t e $3381.75 


Ratio of employed to population, 1 out of every 24. 


NEW ORLEANS, LA. 


PAPDSLION ciate sd'eg-s asc PRES Go ae PROMS ter ena a COM Meee eee ne 216,000 
‘Fotal numberof persons employed s.. sos es scss vie aele doe sh bree 9,504 
ME ae Ae cay is Foie Ba hic Wit ae a eo ie Ney Ge ER 7,666 
PCPIAB IESG siass toda Sie «as piece Din Sk a's Gwe Meal oad Bie a ates eee Se es tate 1,286 
MOINS co hc eae uk hk bw ev Rie be tele Canoe Ceae nS shacse i sae tel eee 552 
BODE WALES PAL ans whence, case a ule epe pic eceae « ao eaten eis wo mete malalnee te $3, 718,000.00 
EBRD Gc say ctik's Sols a ova s eo kn od oe poe Sen nae Pees ie $391 00 


Ratio of employed to population, 1 in 22. 


PROVIDENCE, R. I. 


PE SEM LOI co's cata pases pats x atte Siete S Seay ese re desseseae’y 104,857 
Total number of persons employed... .......ssseccces Shes : 22,891 
EA IOS Sus GRR TGs wed Se et odes ene eee eee a clo Sie aie Se tito 16,500 
BICC eet Ls SUR Ss Ma dpe ete So FES We OAc Sea eee tere gets 5,125 
POET Sacra ce Wy Lens Woe no ae WRN OTe ils aly oe Uk BU ee Lk eae 1,716 
Total wages paid............0 EWS UY ICY Oia se warn abe eae $9,464,110.00 
PMMA GMTV RCD 5 <2 se a Eko Ueawdnie «BU wah bea nla ole bee Luli bak ees ye $413.50 


Ratio of employed to population, 1 in 4. 


RICHMOND, VA. 


Pee ONL iy ata cory o's « vin'e ere sin oes ow eae STE po Saree ent sae ~ 638,600 © 
Otel PEF GIMDIOV CL. a6. airs igo <a sdoe% ss wade ris sapien ; 13,047 
DATO es CAI gee ns ea oy pwd wh ws wahbicd Rete Bee eee Sty 9,218 
Females........ oa nl viol a eee eae ee He ET WES ne Me HA bi. PA pee 
WY OULHG Ceasar areas reas seat Be SM nM ER Bas 5 See ee are aga 1,957 


BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH  =—*965 


Total wages paid...... GS Tet ANE Oe AR rs te $3, 206,456.00 
OTE TM Cr Ra Re onl NOISES AE Sas EI cal a ets Cae sien ets $214.00 


Ratio of employed to population, i in 44, 


AUGUSTA, GA. 


BROMUIALIONS. «2.05 0400.05 00 Ue eee Ns vate Aewwdiedds cess 21,891 
BR PRMUNUREBEOTIMOV CO. cei ccs ah ete ue os cules sic duke care és 1,680 
RI RMCRRY secre OMG OCLs cin hens hae COREL AA pee N eee we 867 
MRCS ODE ern sha csaeds Sigs Ca La oS Wa ee RS ace ee eee ee plies B11 
Re ee sa vas Sale cela eta Crete ES coches 302 
Total wages paid pin cue S alec Oo dw Mat eee aaraacisie MoS Canwest $448, 825.00 
PSSST ag a one a ge all Oe a REN ee $267.75 


Ratio of employed to population, 1 in every 13. - 


DUBUQUE, IOWA. 


Wee OeGOt tom c o cee bats sinus cathodes seo les ee Noele Ge ais 22,254 
PameeMUIDDEP CLUPIOVCD, «aca scene se taesesateyseteescsss p ems 2,903 
ee re igre ee RIPE gb e at teres Se Banat 2,619 
Oe enc i, ih es coh oe ae Pas ota te ck els IE REN Fie 292 
Rn RCs hie ek esl eles See ts howe ak sot eas ee eel ce ~ 92 
PERM MBMCH DAML... ss «ye 075 0p Malesia dee viCE es Rau ore wuaeper $1,389, 730.00 
RMN Reap Sica Svea e ielile vp eh ie hoe e kt Vis $461.50 


Ratio of employed to population, 1 in every 7. 


LOUISVILLE, KY, 


Derdation GoM ys Oa EWP e RE Pa NEES wae Spica reese Mae 123,758 
Potal number: of persons EMployed .....cieceec ei csnsisceesovecece’s 17,448 
PM ese asa vee tec Tile ccs ete ig eis he win Sve aides Rocce aed Bod wks 13,480 
Serre teen oa ie Oe crate Tae cafe OS antaet Ep pew ahioie ¢ bikes 2,829 
eR RE eS ces le here ey MUR gin oe eh otncee Cabin eR dete ee 1,189 
BE WOON DIU: eee css Setar ee TOES eee ek pw eels Cb ced $5,835,545.00 © 
PRESEN EGE ors 2 gies ao Soe esi sein oie BOG ge N wees SEARO CLARA SEs $094. 55 


_ Ratio of employed to population, 1 in every 7. 


It will be observed that the ratio of women and youths in the 
cities in the States advocating the protective system is greater than 


in the free-trade States, showing a wider range of opportunity; but 
‘what is still more significant, the ratio of those employed to the 


whole population is still greater. For instance, Cincinnati employs 
1 in every 4; Charleston, 1 in 23; Boston, 1 in 6; St. Louis, 1 in 8; 
Philadelphia, 1 in 4; New Orleans: Lin 22; Tp well Mass., more than 
1 in 8; Richmond, Vas, 1 in 44. 
Passing from the cities to the States, the showing is more pal- 
pable against our free-trade friends. The showing is as follows: 
Compare Wisconsin with North Carolina: 


y : k 
" 4 a 7 
a _ 3 ~ re 
5 TP ae, eee a ot 


266002=——<—*é“‘«sé*‘«éa WEAN BUTTERWORTH. — 


oes Soe RO) ALS Se eR Rs Prt ae iar ee BN 


NORTH CAROLINA. 
POP WB ON oe Goo clea nalp ees «cle bie sine Ve Kren 9 mise tnd wae 1,400,000 
Product of mantifactories a Ve pO ee ee $20,095,000.00 
PPOUCAULIAAE anc RES eee tins LN ey PREC OR ee ‘haa $14.00. 
WISCONSIN. 
PG NMONIGN. Se see satin @ Mints iiiess wong sok y eNE CONN Tee a Eee 1,315,060 
Product of manufactories,......... ate fh peited Beh maa ee $128, 255, 000.00 
JPR OS ES st UN a ARR ge BS raat PO Apdo ses! Ae. $97.00 
MISSOURI AND ILLINOIS. 
Missouri: 
ODA On eas OCS ie se ak etree eee SRA ML hy a ark te LU earns 2,168,000 
PIPOUMCHIOL TAA LLACLOLION. Geko ia ee iee ere bleiele vlots eg Seba eT $165,386,000.00 
PCTECATEAT. Uuordis os tig Ge boa Bik © Pew oldlaldl'g stares eee cran se @iteeciotan teen $73.00 
Illinois: ede | 
MITEL LEON) (iso. dhs Sed oy ual vad ated a WE a ee po eae Ones whcaave dane 3,078,000 
PE POGUCL OL MANULACLOTIER sow ane es bom wish alae ku NG a letstor toot $414,865,000.00 
PORCADLM ei aes e's PTO ieee pertes Matereitee Gabiebys 6 Gere aa eruee $131.00 
VIRGINIA AND MICHIGAN. 
Virginia: 
Population ...... eae ethe dade dels ck h co cise aaa halen cee mee reel 1,512,500 
SEONG OL WMADILACLOLICS. » .le'ss.neleee see ep eee’ s neteas eo ca bee $51,781,000.00 
Reta LY uh b acaliatn's aco bie ee ait meee NaceeeU oie e epee $34.00 
Michigan: 
Population ....... Pe RST Sane Ape AA SW On Anes fH 1,637,000 
Procuctor manitactOries.. 6. Miles cee ween See eae e $150, 715,000.00 
8 64) 10 SEU AES RIM Ie. Seni BAUS SAR hy SN ge UAE Gh $92.00 
OHIO AND GEORGIA. . 
Georgia: 
TOD UIATION Wis, oles wy aie PAP PRONG Shee OR Vy Pa ie bare ss APY ahs 1,542,000 
HERO OTOD TACUOTICR 1k os wists eid cuss Gate ald ice oor cbs ow Olen tie o eleee $36,440,000.00 
VEL TES OER WE TE ere ae sh pean a rat Met GSPN para eA Spohn. <b -4) $23.00 
Ohio: 
PT AAAMLOME Mie’, Zhao Sara cia k's eta ic goals oo Sn liccdih coe EEE eae te 3,198,000 
Pacduet OL. Manufactoriesy:: 2i'. su clk ek kee oe Fara pie reel pletewe asta $348,298, 000.00 
SAEs Usks alg sales aloha lavas S Recess eM tN esstcoseico analy Dhaesin oe pasate $108.00 
NEW JERSEY AND MARYLAND. 
Maryland: 
PIO OVANI ON Cisne y's oe cia a a RRO eT eG EMAE OS a bine See UR ES 935,000 
AUT ACLOLIOS «5 oops oie dala 6 Fda doe 4 Son 0a wre shies ciara ees $106,800,000.00 
PG UAW ne Wi bed fa coe sce wake cee os Lalas ooo tee eure eae were $114.00 
New Jersey: 
PU SOULIATROIN Ce OTs ata is kyo 0d ug 0 6 Sn wala dis Sipiave wis ed Sie on nak eset 1,131,000 
rT ht AAC EOTIOR) <OUe aw 0 acocela. 05s orn ocala ke eee ets ela art wade $254,880,000.00 


Depa ce SAU Wing Mpa Rt ee VR a PnP PEE oye Togs Sa Ager) Foe Se - $224.00 


- BENJAMIN 


: IOWA AND MISSISSIPPI, 
Mississippi: 


4 PINE st Av acd ca metas RAC OTe Uy ie woe ns cas ace ware ces 1,132,000 
mre TOUICK OL factories. 0s. Tae od ees s a gueores ve Ae etl Veith $7,518, 000.00 
PPGRCBTILG 6h leks ieee s ced s amine te tale oye dis'e «cag A aloe $6.62 

hg Towa: 
MePaPEIP LONE Ao oS 5 daly, Wis SL G acid bos anie ek vs OG wba gets wee eae 1,625,000 
Pererenries, Ol PROLOTIOde fe. SON. ler. es te oo ont Lise bk b Une ke ... $71,045,000.00 
UCEEE ASM thes e's fe leis anc «6 oe tie Wesco nidlacie onc a Bie sleet $43.00 


- 


RESULTS IN AGRICULTURE COMPARED. 

But to make the showing more complete, and, as you doubtless 
claim, and possibly with justice, to equalize matters, we will turn te 
‘agriculture; but, unfortunately for tariff-reform philosophy, the 
showing is no better. Take Ohio and Georgia: 


a OHIO. 
Number employed in agriculture, in round numbers.......... 397,500 
Product of farms, exclusive of live-stock and farming imple- 
ts Fe tS coche ower oud eewct cove cen dees tna vin vs LOO UTTUOROG 
Pye MERE nthe. Largs Mie aiee signee LG sh aca v aalan wg See ant 3,198,000 
DE RPA es choad 2 Suictiy Hele Eh dia v bo tips clea Sie ods tine $394.00 


It is proper to add that there are 247,200 farms, which will 
indicate that there are employed as wage-workers or renters 150,300. 


GEORGIA. 
DO Te athe errs ole hese ei hiecies@ sete clei! ¢aseeees wes 1,542,180 
fe Number employed.in agriculture. . 00.0562. dees Pe 432,400 
- Value of farm product, exclusive of live-stock and farm imple- 
OPIS S 9, SRD 2X tig ae gOS roa ge ay ce a a $95,913.00 
cael: VLE eer rey eee enn Pr aaseeeree tes és $155.00 
Take Missouri and Illinois: 
hon 2 
ILLINOIS. 
ETN ELEGY LON 55, Wy lan 10 fay sin ore lotmodne mis ove e's tory id ese) « peuseile sink pecveee 8,077,871 
Peeraer CMPlOyeG-1M. APTICUIEUTE, oo. 6 cack wk Gee aman soe mee 436,370 
Value of product exclusive of live-stock and farm implements. .$208, 980,000.00 
Per CAPA... ss. >. ee tr Oh pene ON A WOR ET RE GML tui Saphalk Man A $476.00 
MISSOURI. 
Population. . oo. oo ae ddge sec ee ty eects vere SA Jo ae asec 2,168, 380 
DCL Cployed INASTICUILUTE. 56 Pelee ce cones eects as 355,300 
Value of product of farms, exclusive of live-stock and farming 
MT IEINCHIS . 5% om vie sce 04 tore eaten ne ss ba RDS oo ce de dy abs $95,918, 000.00 
beer OA tae cis Gn vse ied pep r coe vin'ein'a els Aare MeeEREL Chk 4 GaSe ti $ 270.00 


BUTTERWORTH, 267 


aS 


Facil) was ine net aM ade tea. ar ok j siete. Bhegr ST ees ie, RR eli el: UNAS a ee a 
268 © BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. ay 
/ 
Take Alabama and Wisconsin: 
ALABAMA 

POGUIAIONNS wisi. tis SG auto bea bak Un aun Ghee es FG plea nocd tar ats 1,202,505 
Number engaged in agriculture: 2.0000... 6c. wide accv eter eve ~— 380,680 
Value of farm products, exclusive of live-stock aid farm imple- 

rok Wes etn eae eed ll ERY ae ELSE IOS Wott AEB ey on Rs 11 $96,873, 000.00 
PU CAN ee Fic ctu pinta oPee we Mind'h 4.06 Woe Ap Sed ae Sms Re Sse $149.00 
PAPE CTO E LATING Fe ac a ois, 6 e+ pele SO ohale Pw NEES Ow ule bles ee _ 185,864 
Mm ber Or acres tiled, .:. sc ssc awe ce bong Satie cts eles oon a 18,855,334 

: ‘WISCONSIN. oS: 

POISON cas ples eyo Se Sas Ge Me eve san seas ab es hee WOU es cea 1,815,497 
Number of persons engaged in agriculture...............0eee 195,900 
Value of product, exclusive of live-stoek and farm implements $72,780,000.00 
OTA IED Cacia v's Shale Nigls wes she ae Ns miep tees Ae aloe aie ee eee $370.00 
INTACT OL TALIS 5 a'd ois w'sie 6g kas Wiesel wee as sgea eS eden 134,322 
PET OS ANON C05 se ee obs h «ove ado oo Pemba e Cade oe Us wee eee 15,358,118 


COMPARISON OF FARMING IMPLEMENTS AND LIVE-STOCK. 


But possibly our free-trade philosophers can show better results 
in live-stock and farming implements and machinery. These are 
evidence of progressive development as they may appear ample or 
- otherwise. 

Here is the showing. Take Georgia and Michigan, the population 
of which is about the same. 


GEORGIA. 
POT NIAIO Dixie a bccvtgit's otc etaa ss SoA CIES CoE SU Niels Owre st oaitee 1,542,000 
Value of farming implements and machinery...........2.0- $5,317,000. 00 
PEO IOCK HEN! 5). Seles oo bn eke oo NCR oh wae eae Ry Chet E ae .«e-  26,000,000.00 
Poel VALUG..5¢us ste tbs ares urd enna has ee teres eet 31,317,000.00 — 
eeH CODE. Sass ss Ey PORE PE ek EET RO $20.00 
MICHIGAN. 
Potente ee hie oa sous es eanaeoay Poets coed ae 1,637,000 
Value of farming implements and machinery........,....... $19,422,000.00 
ETO cig PO RAC eis s »'o'o ayn o> Sho gage ene a alee CMe ote aes 55, 720,000.00 
STAI MALO; aie cote bide Wat piney a ce aires ne eels ude tee en bie by ena 
Per CADURcGis's's sks Se RCP se ee oce ae os 40 be CR a Tae e aT tee an $45.00 


BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. | 269 
IOWA AND VIRGINIA, 
Virginia: 
Population...... A ee Se OT COS ee oe es eens pi os pee 1,512,500 
Value of farming implements and machinery...........-.00 $5,495,000.00 
Ree OLORIINE heir in oleh ete ree Ce Nag a a or rt la od a 25, 958,000.00 
A MEVEIUG Ho os CS oe aaa eae ve nord es ea ea ie Hy -+..  81,448,000.00 
Per capita, ee? P@eoeovreese e@erecr reece rps eerovoovnenoe+ es CPF Hoe Hee Bea ee F = 20. 00 
Iowa: 
TOT eis ee, vn gk EO hat oe See EN Cra ee eee 1,624,615 
Value of farming implements and machinery................ $29,372, 000.00 
eNO MES al ares co wnt CR oS cee Pu cee swe wee ee cee 124,'715,000.00 
MAAR VGIUGL Career Ory SCOR Oe See. URE ee, pre 154,087,000.00 
PREP OIC en ec, Cane enter ae Surg: 94.00 
NORTH CAROLINA AND WISCONSIN. 
North Carolina: é 
PE OTMABULON 2 olen Salone ues ale « Bree creme a ge eG tata’ SD se 1,400,000 
Value of farming implements and machinery................ $6,078,000.00 
Ramee eet tn a er Ce gmat gel Neel elec 4 as oa & Cu eo ha ee 22,415,000.00 
PEELE COMIC eis sae 4 einia Detaled 8 Re Wie ek oa) du Riejare Sian ..  28,498,000.00 
PMIBADO Toor ot go tbl ce ieee Me deo od oe ed eo Ree eek oa mee’ 20.00 
‘Wisconsin: 
Popnlations. +... vis. bers COME ae Aa PEN ee RE SBI EIOr 1,315,497 
Value of farming implements and machinery................ $15,647,000.00 — 
MUU ee ety re oes se tld ewe ed dev dgeh s20 divs a ony Ab, 00S cue 
Total value........ Cire Peue Gee ou eke tas Pole sree. 62,155,000. 00 
Fe gpa San rina he poise tonsa. (ire ary oe gan rst ere 55.00 
WEST VIRGINIA AND NEBRASKA, 
West Virginia; 

RSPPOMUIAMION 6. Ue ces de Saree eweee ede secesteseuscosseeses 618,457 
Value of farming implements and machinery........ ee acs $2,700,000. 00 
eee ee ee eee cs oie e heb wees vc eeewewainre 17,742,000.00 

SPOtaE WALES po ewes wee sete eee es eee Leb eer « naman - 20,442, 000,00 

DR ace edd Hoes ona oh ae gro Seles siehein pinnae Some t.cie sfele's. a's o's 15.00 
Nebraska: 

MAO MMION ar hy See asa esate s uc apiieces ds 4 ews cence e #6 es 452,402 

Value of farming implements and machinery..............-- $7,821,000.00 
ey TOC eee rete ene; ewan es oo bocie ce che a. 83,444, 000.00 

NSIT VAIO Sh Hes eae ce cos eee des ecseeemecmeeens mes 41 265,000.00 
\ Per capita aie) el aiat ets SHR a ves eeen sie ewasees ree 10 6e ¢9 ee 9 Be 8 Oe simak 91.00 


SORE, TIA ie y= Fy " =f a . f we ise Wek Bae. goatee 0 ee “i Gy ae ae oe Sie Pig a a A 
; ‘ ; oA 5 gie ! : i. 7 Uh aoa 
270 BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. ame: se 


ARKANSAS AND CALIFORNIA, 


Arkansas: | 
Population...... dw phe aU NOt wateraeidtre ieten G he avers Savataete Coane 802,525 
Value of farm implements and machinery.........+...++--+- $4,637,000.00 : 
Live-stock..... eeoorseoeoenee 3 ereececueeoeveeeneveseoeoesen eoecoeveoeeeoe > 20,472,000. 00 

PAO WAL Cin atcceo alee olete soe meee han oleteen ft Rois oles «-» 25,109,000. 00 
Pret CAT, a bole nee ses eh a PPR TPR ST a ke eh 31.00 

California: 

Population see@eee@seeeseceoe ve @GCP@eseeceseseeeeeeeeeee ee es eeeeee eaeseeee@ 804,696 
Value of farm implements and machinery..............2+.. $8,448,000.00 
Live-stock eeeeeneceeeoceseerseeoeeeaesesne eee eeseae oe eeeeneesccee 30, 500, 000. 00 

OLE VALUC. v2 so ech chee ees sees eiwseh Seat seh ee .  48,948,000.00 
Pericenita, o.'7 0... Leis Wish waaaninieh eeitkune nhs asin es aie eS 54.00 

SHOWING OF CARPENTERS AND BLACKSMITHS. 

Among the very important artisans and mechanics and workmen 
in every well-ordered community are the carpenters and black- 
smiths. Business activity with them indicates the presence of those 
comforts and conveniences which are inseparable from healthful 
progress. For the edification of our friends, in order to evolve all 
the philosophy possible from known facts and existing conditions, I 
present the work done in the several States by these useful members 
of the community. The showing in the several States is as follows; 

States that favor protection. 
Product per capita. 
States. 
Carpentering. anes 

GALT cree 5 ea seis hats Neos oaks oe GOs pl SUING here lene Slat cera aIER $1.81 $0.82 

1 ESAT CYS 7 3 2 ee aga a aA BSAA Hy Sh PER) MEAG oy ae ane, Oa SL 4 1.82 

UNTO Nee ete yor whales 'e s'ce'e's sc cess Bieisis'k Dinos plain: Neiganeeiy c were eae s & 1.92 .98 

Michisan chee lia 0 BER SIs BRE 1.07 94 

NETHOA SOLE Ereer en ¢ 21 loos ofa indices vinon cays Bade Hecemmioee tegne eet 2.21 98 

IN SDENG RA AO ei e's cece e wees slnla's SiNs sais ne sie ew ce sek Weaces 2.14 87 

PN OW ERBINTORTILD Beloit eins fbi s wicie biatyie'd eae baboperesinisl dele wales 2.47 1.37 

INES CBC Notice weg «cies e's o 0 Sersibcs sap a eRbis ciety erm ll neoiete seis 3.53 1.07 

EN GRY (OT Cer eae Ae dc) s cis Seterc's cle we cle bees eval greiuete Wied steal s die cee 3.82 1.23 

PO ee ee sas aa ws dsnies La pene e on oeuitate 1.51 95 

POH TISY LVETIGN ei see a eels © ob, 5 soles Oe tiele's Pus bite s eeu R toe one 1.90 1.01 

IVGLILOD GAG ys vic Mares Solo dle vind visi ie'eies 116) Bato asd lexaiete he lose e Ciereta eur interes .48 1.57 

AVASCONSIIN ere otalarsleare abies tis's'em sieroie'e oles © s-trarctotaelato aeons guava ate 1.13 20 

COMMBGHCUD LT iis pasesticcna Seb s ose py beste Seesech easuease (eeu 4.98 1.17 
UIA es oe tele her ohe nate lak ons cv ae 0 tae enis Maemeaee 1.01 -98 ~ 

AW Boe tose Sea enya ae SAME NED soi S sae pious pss hb as ua ee tenis 1.40 96 


PTO CLO Ge Lf eS tad ae 


--RaNgAMIN BUTTERWORTH. Bera ee ate 


Anti-protection States. 


Product per capita. 
States. 
Carpentering. coining 

Aa UDELL TIGL stra eerste ate ale Cosve re cralrae eee eic MOE aie iN Sale oleae eral cisieers $0.27 $0.18 
PALPACELTA SUS Se eeeD Lc oe cai trolena < visiuic vials ae preted alae deme c seme Minelsers Apeas* .26 
Delaware........ es PALA WAS RE IRR ral Ane EPL Rie SPS Ne abe Na edie a 2.14 1.01 
PRELONSCRE A ae ARIE mene PAE ARS wha odes shale nid aralia eo Me cho tec aieeearelle tes .33 -21 
PREMSRONA crate cia Nyc myaicionn oar ia oterce ciclg aiave ales giao cite sieinieieie\e vias oeien .53 .81 
PA ERP N2 Lc awe rene See 0 Soe Feel oho hS ela eis weg ears ale S piabeie Dain @ute Milclu’s oleleiels -93 67 
PRMALSREUUT CUE rats we viaivic Cela a ie lee orc bere eee oe oe abso Sele eee cae .49 .30 
VRE MIEDTT Corn aera cls cies cle cele MN clelulchsis ok wig a ostatoets woe tee cilia 3.88 1.01 
PUTED DDE ie latcta tar cig'e's siwieloieiaieiSia sie tcislarai dw ainis’sle trsielais eels ales e she's 15 15 
MRS NOUID Ui rtrteeea ae os ciouro ecw eros cod scenes Cee Ree cer ete Se 2.32 .98 
PPECUHPAD EVOL AN 02s calc ciaaic te sesstetvc ctid suis vislevins clove alsaiab Bees ee .16 16. 
POPPE PRCILT OVID creme oe a col ciate ciniale crus ae bine Phlols AERC Woe bie Ue ewe 33 19 
BRATIMOSSOO Wheto Moret sos ok ce toa a led So eitisce Mee wed voeeueks .42 .45 
“NESE AGLI ab | der Si teal rt SURF erat ANCA gS amet Re GUE 41 .46 
Yt 0 EW, I ids Baa ose dS GEE ea naioat MCP an robe J ipa a ea LA .56 .40 
WV OGUNY IDOI ui oreae cetera often afte iecieaiie oul weclcetine sasleg ew Klee 34 42 


: INVENTION STIFLED. 
But let us search again for evidence that the influence of your 


. philosophy has been beneficent in results, 


I submit that there is no higher or better evidence of an en- 


_ lightened and progressive people than is found in the product of 


their inventive genius. Our fathers wisely provided for the encour- 
agement of scientific research and progress in the mechanical arts, - 
by giving to authors and inventors for a term of years the exclusive 


- ownership of the new and useful products of their hands and brains. 
No other source has been more fruitful in valuable contributions to 


our present prosperous and happy condition. How has the seed 
sown where your philosophy has had the ascendency borne fruit? 


_ Ts it rich in authors or inventors? What is the grand total of results 


in these two fields of labor? 


Again, I call the ‘‘ Buckeye” State forward. Let her record dis- 


~ close what the genius of her people has supplied to the national 
growth in the industrial arts. Here is the record for the fourteen 


years immediately preceding January 1, 1885: Number of improve- 


ments in the arts, etc., by Ohio, as evidenced by patents issued, 


15,065. Now, place by Ohio’s side Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, 


_ Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, North Carolina, 


South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia, 


fourteen sovereign States. ‘Altogether, during the same period, they 


have contributed in new and useful inventions only 14,887. 
What is the matter, gentlemen? Do not those who adopt your 
philosophy desire the better ways and happier conditions?. Or does 


ce wie 2 : ; pee a Cae Na eater THe ee OO ee eee ee 
rye BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. (ee a 


its presence stifle the genius of invention, even as it retards your 
progressive development in the fields of enterprise to which we have 
called attention? 

pihpek WORSE AND MORE OF IT, 

But let us continue our search to find some justification for your 
abiding in the faith which is so palpably condemned by the works 
which are the evidence of its influence. Possibly in the field of 
literature and journalism you will fare better. We shall see. 

If it will not be deemed utterly immodest, I will call Ohio for- 
ward again, bringing with her [llinois, a younger sister, and they 
together shall show you what they have done in the direction of 
distributing intelligence among the people. The comparison is 
instructive, and may in part, at least, explain why Ohio and Illinois 
have stood by the protective system, and why the States with which 
they stand in comparison have opposed it. . 

Under the caption ‘‘ Number of newspapers mailed to subscribers 
or news agents by publishers and news agents” we have the follow- 
ing exhibit: : 


UMAI MRI 35 rT chee atv hie wb 3 web ba eas aise Ee eek ee see Rane oer 4,037,832: 
PP NMCISAN 2 hnhh s Lia ro.c% Seg s Os Va sb alee Beas CEs Mais She aleaiee Suite a owe SER EOE 3,606,356 
PIELAMWAT Es Vis vo oo vie Coles aes el re eee be ok i's CDi uns 1s ea 1,141,348 
PIC se tes ge eee Seek Oo CRN ISL Pe oe OE Se ee ge a onines See 1,141,452 
PEON a TAs he ire ay far eS Po Weert tar, ane oak, Yaaee 15,355,288 
POOBUHCK Ys ae i. 52 sd ede dees MGS)s Sdoe OSetba GRA «OE TNEO ass cares .. 17,448,296 
TMI S (ae «hss se sed bide aoe Wolken CBR Ce oa g De nN wee 6,645,152 
Dey Sars, CTC ao RS SW mde Salle g is bd ae noms eps bibecate cere aise 9,670,282 
WEISS IBS PES Tc kd os Sas Hie wiece's ola Sis com Hb eile see A Rieke we eRe 3,304,604 
SNGYEUMOATOLING ics 6d 0's 6 ccd 2 bo Wieic wisle we, cad ale Se gyat aa aptelhn vee gaia 6,235,372 
OI SAT OLS So's oath cap oa 5 pe toes Gin MN wie w kas wee raceme 4,376,480 
EREDORAEE cs Cee eas Cela co ames SPUN RECS ee oe te OCR ER GL meee , 12,620,712 
PESRAS StI GEE cd Soc LSE Sse hia SNe othe Sela ge aw pie ole Cas beets see 12,066,756 
AP ENRAIEE tips his g's tant ie eee-s Git UM oA penis ote S55 Se ie ea bint Bie eee 46,128,784 
Wareinia. os oA we TP ovial Midge es Sb ivoc u oar erate aS nin as hase ame eee abe 8,639,384 
YY Geb V INP TID os eo ei oes So ac eas Oe bk ais ale ew eh gare aah a ane 

Total of the sixteen anti-protection States............ .-.« 156,203,516 

Now Ohio and Illinois: 

OBI Cee ol oes GOK wie We Van eee PaCS leis panes 5 oy Se ean ee eee 72,125,560 
PHOS EES Wee ak xs ete ihante awake shop wrclucetaceth ase ope ees kare 87,128,444 

POA ne deaee tava ue eres eA DS aed o Seetada a Se Oin uta sham 159,254,004 


Showing difference in favor of these two protection States, Ohio 


and Illinois, of 3,050,488, “aa 


figele  clg ahe 8 pe SEN all is Migr me bee a ie it aA ae Pea aw a + hatin Tens SEAR PR aN A eo tan OS Aaa MA, SUR go 
ori a. a J . » amas o ie e iS Bs ‘ F v + 


BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH 73 


But peradventure publications of a higher order, which evidence 
more recondite learning and philosophical research, have flourished 


better. Let us examine. 


Under the classification ‘‘ Number of magazines and other period- 


icals mailed to subscribers or news agents by publishers and news 


agents’ we have the following exhibit. 
Ohio is so closely identified with all the other States, being bound . 


to them by all the ties of consanguinity and common interest, that I 


feel that with characteristic reserve she may stand up again for 
comparison. 
Here is the showing: 


RU DOMIB Se 6's sos kG arose sce s 26,700 | South Carolina............ 8,820 
POTHIER es iia dc eecek bees 23,302 | TENNessee, . 2 ds ek on ss ene ne 553, 008 
TIEN WETE OO oa ie See ee 19,260 | Texas...... ids ere teeters 21,818 
PPE ETS. crt visi lohe'd a's Saleto\ of ws AOA NV IRDIN fiers coat he a ale b aiets 361,056 
REO Arn res kei fs aiales 651,386 | West Virginia............. 6,948 
Kentucky...... Nee Weed les 100,656 ——_—__. 
PAPUIEROTIS Ss a e's s 0) 78g ce ors 24,888 Total number in 16 anti- 
WERTVIRNC ee cele coc ceu ces 193,512 protection States..... 3,890, 852 
EPROM DE ge /ie oo acp.p ais 1,982 | Total number issued in Ohio 6,498,216 
POMERAT ES te any c.c'e bec a he 1,865, 784 ———— 
Worth Carolinas. 5.5.0.5. 30,864 | Difference in favor of Ohio... 2,607,864 


It is written, ‘‘Show me thy faith without thy works and I will 


_ show thee my faith by my works.” I have presented to you and to 


the country the works which are evidence of your faith, being born 
of it; and have likewise testified to our faith, proving it by the 


works we have shown. ‘‘By their fruits ye shall know them.” 
~ You walk in the letter of your faith; we in the spirit of ours. 


‘Verily the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.” [Applause.] 


THE SHEPHERD AND THE SHEEP. 


I was interested to hear my honorable friend from Indiana [Mr. 
Bynum] talk about sheep. He seemed to derive great satisfaction 
from the number of sheep he found to the square mile in the coun- 
tries of the Old World. . 

It is a peculiarity of his philosophy that it takes more satisfaction 
in the condition of the sheep than in the prosperity of the shepherd. 
His concern is about the sheep, ours about the shepherd that tends 
the sheep. [Laughter and applause.] _ 

In the nations that challenge his special admiration the sheep 
wear the fine coats. Here it is our purpose to clothe the shepherd, 
if need be, at the expense of the sheep. But protective philosophy 
cares for the flock-tender, and, per consequence of that, for the flock. 

The statement, however, shows that the progress made here 


Si tao ‘i bo ee Pak, * 1) a. bor oe tu a e if a cue ORs , ee Penta eee ys of jo 
974 BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. ae age oe “7 


under the influence of the EperonraHie system does not compare 
favorably with the later period when Republican policy maintained 
the ascendency. Let us see. 

The increase of wool under the tariff compared to increase during 
the preceding years: 

Between 1850 and 1860 increase 14.7 per cent. 

Between 1860 and 1870 increase 66 per cent. 

Between 1870 and 1880 increase 147 per cent. . 


Nor is this increase in aggregate pounds of wool alone to be con- 
sidered, but the further fact that the weight of fleeces increased as — 
follows: 

In 1850 average 2.3 pounds. 

In 1860 average 2.7 pounds. 

In 1870 average 3.5 pounds. 

In 1880 average 4.4 pounds. 


And the showing is equally satisfactory in regard to the develop- 


~*-ment of woolen manufactures. Here is the exhibit: 


1850. 1860. 1870. 
BUS UAAMIEIDOD US s'a'pn.0 5 nih a g's. 0'96 <a ocr sees chee siege hee 1,817 1,260 2,891 
MUA STS eee S eee oy oe ok oye a sees PETE Ge dik se Mastin tied 34,895 28,050 80,053 
CR PUCIE oe 6 8icih @a's ia W vee winds) essa a mex o's ein aas olga op Ne RADE $26,671,000 | $30,862,000 | $98,824,000 
NNEC Fa os eis Unibet as ssa tea ciacs beet ca coree sen 7,168,0 9,808,000 26,778,000 
IMESOPIAIE S50 SP hs's poke van sedia dof eas as sereaen amis 24,912,000 36,587,000 96,433,000 
PE ROOUCU Cs 55 3 sce ls simoas'e eat PE Uapaee vans late Sinieishoe ss eieearalG 43,542,000 61,895, ,000 155, 405, 000 


A showing that should set at rest the clamorous cry that from 
1850 to 1860 were the years of our country’s greatest prosperity. 

Now I turn to the pig-iron industry, and I apologize for seeming, 
for a single moment, to usurp the throne of my honored friend from 
Pennsylvania [Mr. Kelley]. 

From 1810, when the yield was 54,000 tons, to 1860—fifty years, — 
during which-time you were endeavoring to put your hands upon ; 
the throat of the protective system, and had it there most of the time 
—the product grew only to 821,000 tons. "While from 1860 to 1880— 
only twenty years—it grew to 3,855,000 tons. 


OUR COMMERCE—UNEXAMPLED GROWTH, FOREIGN AND INTERSTATE. 


~ One would naturally suppose from the assaults made upon the 
protective policy that its influence had been to restrict our com- 
merce, international and interstate; that our exports and our imports 
had fallen off, and that domestic interchange of commodities was 
oppressed and dwarfed. The exact reverse is true. They have both 
grown with unexampled rapidity. 


BI Mc OMe EL eT MRT Ly ny EN itne MEDION AME ee ERIM ET zeae” Soest OEE rT Dee 


BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH, spi | 


In the period of pronounced protection, dating from a time when 
_ the system was recognized and established as an economic policy to 
_- be maintained, our exports and imports have grown beyond anything 
of which the country had knowledge before, except that our exports 
of specie have been reduced, and that because we have paid our 
_ debts abroad with the products of our factories and fields, keeping 
___ the gold and silver in the pockets of our people. | 
' This is true of our foreign commerce and true of our local and 
interstate commerce. Gentlemen speak of the necessity for free 
interchange of products—that our protective system has impaired 
that freedom. This was uttered time and again by my honored 
friend, Mr. Wheeler, of New York, in our discussion in Tremont 
Temple, in Boston—opening his eyes to what would result from his 
abstract philosophy and closing them to the real facts that were 
under his nose; the real fact being that never in the history of the 
world was there such unrestricted and such enlarged commerce; 
- never were‘there so many articles which were the subject-matter of 
- commerce, nor so many instrumentalities and agencies for their free 
_. interchange as are to be found in the United States to-day as the 
tt result of the protective system. 3 
; And I say ‘‘as the result of the protective system” because the. 
figures show that I am right, and that under the old quasi free-trade 
régime progressive development was handicapped, and, when not 
paralyzed, moved at a sluggish pace. 

I here insert the figures which vindicate the correctness of my as- 
sertions, and utterly discredit the statements of my friends upon the 
other side to the effect that we are a suffering people by reason of 
the system that they are attempting to destroy. 

The House and the country will observe that from the foundation 

of our Government up to and after the passage of what was known 
as the ‘‘ Statute of Abominations,” which was a distinctly protective 
#ariff as contradistinguished from a tariff for revenue, the balance of 
trade, in spite of the best efforts of the producers of this country, © 
was against us until 1836, when the balance was in our favor some 
sixty-two millions; butit will be observed also that Democracy made — 
all possible haste to again turn the tide in favor of foreign nations, 
so that on down to 1860 the balance was against us. Weneither had 
a great home market nor did we supply the wants of our people as 
now; but after Republican ascendency in the nation, and the over- 
throw of free-trade philosophy, prosperity came back to us in every 
shape, and in every form which could suggest otyiliged and enlight- 
z, vai development. 


BE Fy 
2) ye ee ate 


Vo aa ae it Pa een ae terrae ee aaa Se Sone fp) A OO in ee = 
Pay SNE See tae SS Ree enor tog Oh on ai 
; : é ie ; 2 : ets 2 = - . : , 
4 ‘ 7 


48 


276 - BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH. 


In 1860 our exports were, in round numbers, $335,000,000, and our 
imports but $373,000,000. 

From 1860 to 1870, notwithstanding the great war which occupied 
half the decade, our exports had grown to $420,000,000, the imports 
being $482,000,000. 

And in 1880 our exports were $841,000,000, and imports $741,000, - 
000; excess of imports $100,000,000. 

A more important and controlling fact in this connection is that 
both the supply and the home market of the United States had been 
more than doubled during this period, nominally twenty years; in 
fact, considering the war, fifteen years. 

The per capita of exports and ee for 1860 and 1880 is as fol- 
lows: 


Per capita. 

1860. TMports..ccccscccssesscscssssesssscssces CeCe oe ee eeeereseroer $1.00 
Exports........ CUES cae e 6 oie Sea ale! sid ly she ele ahe ibis Gros is twigs (CHER 1.11 
ASOOSAINVOLIS |< 'o1c.s oe aiebigie icc 's bes s sue usw sa oe ke yea as 1 ee eee 1.07 
PAX OTIS 25550 Sc ais obo Seana 9. ee ol ane -ule-9 -eheeiohe, ered ne wt beatin eee 1.66 


It is interesting in the presence of the hominy submitted to this 
House, which so utterly condemns the philosophy of the Mills bill, 
and so eloquently pleads the cause of the protective system, to hear 
my honored friend from West Virginia [Mr. Wilson] felicitate him- 
self on the fact that the column he leads is moving forward, lance in 
rest, to put to rout the hosts of protection. 

I am glad there is some evidence on that side of the House of a 
forward. movement. The statistics I have submitted do not indicate 
anything of that character. 

I have no fear, however, that our adversaries will make substan- 
tial progress, but if they do, be assured it will be amid ruined indus- 
tries, and a bankrupt and idle populace. 

My friend said cheerfully, ‘‘ We shall goforward. The people are 
behind us.” If he alludes to the people of the sixteen States in which 
he musters his free-trade army, I agree to the correctness of the 
statement; and speaking of them, I too can say, ‘‘ The people are 
behind us, from fifty to seventy-five years.” [Laughter and ap- 
plause.] And I may add that I shall rejoice if, under some happy 
influence, they shall come up abreast of us, so that we can march 
forward together to glorious industrial achievement, ‘as suggested by 
my honored friend from Michigan [Mr. Burrows]. - 


THE NEW SOUTH. 


And I have the sincerest pleasure in showing to my friends from 
south of the Ohio that the influence of the protective system, push- 
ing aside their philosophy, has demonstrated to them and to the 


€ 


ee 


“yk Ss 5M ep ans A Balen bcc a a caries nek Sie ot a cia ae ane cae atom ag oe for 


BRNIA Min BUTTER WORTH . 277 
world what is possible Sli thend, Gideon theroepnGre policy they 
would destroy. 

Let me show you what you have accomplished since 1880. Let 


me point you to the gigantic growth which you would retard and 
the prosperity you would destroy. 


Here is the comparison between 1880 and 1888 of the progress 
made in the Southern States: 


1880, 1888, 
Miles of railroad.............. Cooter sents haa ts Pete ke ok 19,431 36,736 
BES IGS OL COLLON (coca fons caececes cess ok tl esau ce Rn wears 5,755,359 6,800, 000 
SIPTT cic, Gee Ap PRP eS nai Pa a a RT bushels. . 431, 074, 630 *626, 305, 000 
MUA MIE AIMS. tore ae alesdis's Sacicts PAC ticle bs Gabinete he tena de-s 28,754,243 44, 830, 972 
SIGE OE AV OCSGOCK ois ais + cad ap ve Dace oats les legit ex's 391,812,254 $573, 695, 550 
Value of va hei MLOGUCUSE sostis no eace Oe etal « 571, 098, 454 #B742° 066, 460 
PME BU Do ee Lee had a5) ca cele ch es tes tons.. 397,301 #929, "436 
CS eR ee fo ead Talo cre oe ciao wise wf ajnle as ee a. aie's gles tons mined.. 6,049,471 *16,476,785 
Nainber Of COLGON- Mills Wise. co oS als eee etek ace cde e tas 179 294 
bac Of spindles.........6-++seee terete ee eeeeeee eres 713,989 1,495,145 
WRITE fe GS rack Sensfeln'e oath a ibe acters his Es alg pee mplecierse 15,222 ,0 
Value “ot COLLON BOOdS......sseeeee essere eens sere sense ees $21,000,000 *$43,000,000 


* 1887. 
Gentlemen, is there a period in your history when you made 


a better showing? Is there an economic policy under which you 


made more substantial progress ? The record discloses that there is 
not. 

NO DANGER FROM HOME COMPETITION. 

One gentleman upon the other side, speaking of the progress 
made in industrial development in certain portions of the West and 
South, said to New England: ‘' It may not be long until you will be 


 erying for protection against the competition of the great West and 


- South.” I say to my friend, he need not be apprehensive on that 


score. If he will study carefully the history of his country’s devel- 
opment and the philosophy it teaches, he will find that under our 
Government, situated as we are with relation to each other, one sec- 
tion of this country has not, and never will suffer by reason of the 
development of the resources, and the utilization of opportunity by 
another section. If it were so, and the danger to which he calls the 
attention of New England was even possible, long since the indus- 
tries of New England and the States east of the Alleghanies would 
have been paralyzed, their factories and mills idle, and their homes 
deserted. 

Why, it was only about thirty years ago that the two young 
States of the West, Ohio and Illinois, entered the arena as active 
competitors of the old States of the East. They sprang, however, at _ 
one bound into the lists, and in 1880 the two States mentioned, Ohio 


BO inch are a SER SATS. Ae Pal ROU og) eck DRURY RSPR Oa Re re a a cc 
ert ‘ ba reo ae, Fa 


978 ye ON TAI BUTTERWORTH. 


and Illinois, put upon the market a ows! amount in value of 
manufactured product than all the New England States and New 
York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware included did in 
1850. It is proper to add that the other States of the West, together 
with Kentucky, Missouri, Tennessee, and Alabama, were developing 
with marvelous rapidity and pouring a vast volume into the reser- 
voir of supply. 

But notwithstanding all this New England, New York, Pennsyl- 
vania and the other States mentioned pursued the even tenor of 
their way, every one of them enjoying unexampled prosperity in the — 
field of productive effort. And they have in no wise complained of 
injury sustained by reason of Western competition. 

You ask, ‘““What becomes of this vast supply ?’ I call my 
friend’s attention to the fact that the American citizen lives better 
than he did; has from 100 to 300 per cent. more of the necessities, 
comforts, conveniences, and luxuries of life. So that consumption 
has kept pace with production. 

T have but a moment to refer to the relation of capital and labor, 
and can only say in that brief moment that the trouble results 
largely from the oft-recurring necessity for a redistribution of labor, 
owing to the introduction of labor-saving machinery, and the addi- 
tional fact that from abroad several hundred thousand persons an- 
nually find their way into the ranks of labor in the United States; 
sometimes they come as contract laborers. It is clear that no other 
nation upon earth could admit such an army to the ranks of its" 
wage-workers without bringing on not only temporary disturbance, 
but riot and possibly revolution. So we have the peculiar spectacle 
of prohibiting the importation of the product of cheap labor while 
admitting without restraint or limit the cheap labor itself. 

But our country will find no advantage in shutting the door 
against any person who brings with him good moral character and 
habits of industry. He becomes at once a source of wealth and 
strength. But against those who represent merely a combination of 
stomach, appetite, alimentary canal, and bad morals it is the duty 
of Congress to shut the door. 

So, now, I submit the question to this House and to my country- 
men whether the protective system as advocated by this side of the 
House should be sustained. You have arraigned against it the Rep- 
resentatives from sixteen States, who advocate the destruction of 
the system and ask to be placed in charge of your industries and to 
dictate your economic policy. 

I ask whether, in view of the ability they display in developing 
their own resources and founding and encouraging manufacturing, 


BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH, — | 279 


they are well fitted to perform the office of guardian of those in- 
terests which are vital to you. Take away or withdraw from the 


TE Abe OE ee il tec ees 
ies 7 ae 


support of the Mills bill the votes of those States that make the . 


' showing alike of indisposition and incapacity to either found or en- 
courage industry of any character, and there will not be left enough 
votes in favor of the bill to pay for counting them. 
I cannot close without complimenting the honorable gentleman 
from Pennsylvania [Mr. Randall] for standing up almost alone in the 
midst of his brethren to defend the great industrial interests of 
Pennsylvania and the whole country, and I want to pay at the same 
time a tribute due to my honored colleague [Mr. Foran] and my 
friend from New Jersey [Mr. McAdoo], and some other Irish-Ameri- 
cans, who while in the Democratic ranks (where they have no busi- 


ness to be) refuse to become the allies and servants of English manu- . 


facturers in doing for the United States what England has done for 
the island whefe sleep the bones of their Irish ancestors. 


HOW IRISH-AMERICANS AID ENGLISH FREE TRADE. 


Tf there is any one man beneath our flag who has less excuse than 
~ another for voting the Democratic ticket it is the Irish-American. 
A few years ago I read in the London Times these words, in 
speaking of the Irish people: ‘‘The only time that England can use 
the Celt is when he emigrates to America and votes for free trade” 
(laughter and applause], which, I may add, he has been accustomed 
to do, in that he has voted the Democratic ticket. But I trust that 
day has passed, and that Irish-Americans will not, while striking 


-. down English power with one hand, uphold it with the other. 


One word and I have done. In instituting the comparisons be- 


tween the different States of this Union, no gentleman upon the 
other side can fairly or truthfully say that my course is prompted 


by any possible spirit of sectionalism. 
_ Ishall be glad when every State south of the Ohio and the Potomac 
shall give evidence of the material prosperity which blesses the State 
that gave me birth. That patriotism is indeed narrow vet fails 
to rejoice in the prosperity of the whole country. 

And I say to my honored friends from the Southern States, the 
time is fast coming, and indeed now is, when the iron in your 
mountains shall awake, and, throwing off its earthy shroudings, 
shall find its way to the furnaces and mills, to the haunts of trade 

- and commerce, and the fields and shops of industry, and the pros- 


_ different system, come to bless you beyond your fondest dreams, 
God speed the day! [Long-continued applause. | 


_ perity which your philosophy has kept far from you will, undera | 


AG ea eee UR RES AAS he ae eke th Reins tie ee Mae tad hen SE a Cu iets gr Dini nla mer Nan r 
7 ; Noe as WS a Pai Sites Agi Fey. pani Rg EYL, 9 Pec RRO ee nee hu are A apie © stale Ee 
\ ~ sto SS Yani ss Se ae 


HON, SAMUEL 8. COX, 


OF NEW YORK. 
(Democratic Side.) 


I had not intended to take part in the general debate upon the 
tariff. I intended to reserve what thoughts were pertinent to its de- 
tails when it came up for amendment in the committee. But for 
certain references of a personal nature to myself I would have re- 
frained. 

For my own choice I have the honor to have in charge the Census 
and Apportionment, which are of more importance, and I may say 
dignity, than any mere temporizing with our fiscal or economic sys- 
tem. The reports of the census form the basis not only of all argu- 
mentation, but of all just legislation in connection with our finances 
and economies; and therefore my time and strength have been de- 
voted to laying the foundation of those returns which are authentic, 
and have reference to our entire country. 

Properly to deduce conclusions on these topics, our lawmakers 
should build upon these foundations. 

In the long and exhaustive debates which have occurred during 
the past few weeks, members have not been loth to draw upon the 
census of 1880, which for completeness and pertinency has no com- 
parison with any former census, or the census of any other land. 


TARIFF A BUSINESS QUESTION. Pisa tomate 


; “The regulation of our system of taxation, whether internal or by 
' customs duty, is a matter of business. It is not a subject for mere 
party discussion, much less for personal recrimination. It does not 
depend on the platforms of parties, nor the utterances of our states- 
men, so much as on facts collected with careful heed by the officers 
of the Government. 
The member who approaches the subject of the tariff with a view 
to making party capital will have more or less of bias, and cannot / 
reach conclusions satisfactory to the general interest, f 
280) Rene: 


SS Pee giants FA, ee ES eee ey. ruse pp * BRS ei WE ie. 20 er eae) 


SAMUEL 8. OOX. 281 


LABOR, CAPITAL, AND LAND, 
What is business? It is the adaptation of means to an end, the 


_-. employment of three factors for the general and individual welfare of 


the people. These factors are labor, capital, and land. Any legisla- 
tion which shackles in any way these wealth-producing forces is, in 
its very nature, tyrannical and unjust. It is the result of discrimi- 
nations and combinations in which the interests of the people suffer. 
' According to reliable estimates the next census of the United 
States will show 64,500,000 inhabitants. It will reveal an immense 
decennial increase over former periods, certainly much greater than 
that between 1860 and 1870, when it was only 224 per cent. © 
Of these factors, the first to be reckoned is capital. We do not 
lack for capital. But it may well be considered whether capital, in 
later years, has had equitable and contented distribution, and how 
far our taxing system has contributed to this end. 
_ We have one and a half millions of arable land, scarcely one- 
quarter of which is in cultivation. Three hundred and twelve thou- 
sand five hundred square miles produce all our grain, hay, cotton, 


sugar, rice, and garden vegetables. We are enlarging our proportion 


of cultivable and pasture lands rapidly, not only by our inward 


growth, but by our immigration. Our mines of gold, silver, copper, 


and coal are only the auxiliaries of our boundless and varied acreage. 
It must, indeed, be a comprehensive system, depending upon a wise 
adjustment, which would deal with our richly-endowed landed in- 
heritance. 

In spite of certain forms of monopoly which are fixing themselves 


upon our land in the shape of cattle kings, railroad grants, and ab- 


sentee landlordism, we are comparatively free from the feudality, 
primogenitive succession, and other aristocratic and exclusive privi- 
leges of other countries. 


ENLARGED MARKET INDISPENSABLE. 


With such an outgrowth in the last century as we have obtained, 
are we not rapidly becoming dependent upon a market beyond the 
limitation of our tariff laws? In fact, is not the home market a bar- 
rier against the supply to and the demand of other nations? Why 
should this flood of good things be dammed in its passage to other 
countries with whom we might exchange? Why should it be flung 
back upon us to destroy and be destroyed? 

These are questions which press upon every farmer in the land, 
and upon every manufacturer who has not the fortune to be com- 
bined in a “‘ trust,” 


282 SAMUEL 8. COX. 


oe PT a TS. OR OE eS OP Sa See a ns ee Ce ae. 5 rie ee 
- FS matt De AG oh is . Sy Gane 2s dat. We y See UR 23 ag Pee rie oe <3 
aN) § - z v 
Fp 


ENLARGED MARKET FOR OUR ORUDE MATERIALS. 


Our crude product forms the bulk of our exports, but should — 


we not be warned by the increasing land products of other countries— _ 


Russia and India and South America—that any restriction against 
foreign trade becomes a self-imposed restriction upon our own. 


SURPLUS THE PRINCIPAL QUESTION. 
The Ways and Means Committee have responded to the urgent 


message of the President with as much wisdom as is possible under ~ 


the circumstances of our industrial system. All the philippics 
hurled at the President return upon his revilers. What he said in 
his pointed and emphatic message was imperatively demanded by 
the extortions which filled the Treasury. The wrong he exposed 


was multiplying, in his judgment, into a brood of wrongs. The | 


Treasury had become a hoarding-place for money needlessly drawn 
from the people. Its withdrawal from the people was bad, then, in 
December, 1887; it is worse now. It menacesour future. It invites 
public scandal. It stimulates public plunder. 

One of our Ohio Democratic statesmen, Governor William Allen, 


used to say that it was as hard to run a powder-house in hell as an 


honest government with a plethoric treasury. [Applause and 


/ Taughter.] 


Where is the relief? Five ways are proposed: 

1. To keep on hoarding? This is only a continuance of the peril. 

2. To spend it? This is the remedy of my friend from Indiana 
[Mr. Browne], who points out many good and many wild schemes 
and largesses for a spendthrift Congress. To this I am opposed. 

8. To pay the debt? This is being tried with the undue bonds; 
with what result? The last purchases which have enhanced those 
bonds show. The President warned us of this remedy as inviting 
the payment by the Government of an increased premium; and the 
facts already more than justify his apprehension. 

4, To deposit the money in banks for use by the people? Against 
this, too, he warned, and wisely so. For one I will never consent _ to 
foster ‘‘ any fateful alliance between the banks and the Treasury,” 
or any ‘‘reliance in private business upon public funds.” It is of 
the very essence of Jacksonian principle to divorce the Federal fise 
from private enterprise. 

5. To substitute for the 4 per cent. bonds due in 1907 a bond 
bearing less interest, say 24 per cent., and pay to the holders money 
equal to the present value of the difference in interest, or rather to 


exchange bonds at a fixed premium, It is a safe investment fora 


ee Wa AS OS aa NE BE oe Ne Ae MAS RE Sel, CT So Nas a abe ae Ce USD» are ea 
se i tia eS 2 ht ge ol Bh li han bogs ee ne we Pirie wa ways EaoN te ‘ 


SAMURE & cox. | 983 


man or a government to invest in hie or its own notes or bonds, 


Perhaps this plan is the best next after reducing taxation. 
6. The last proposition is the one before us. It is the 


REDUCTION OF TAXATION, eee ie as. 


internal or otherwise. Who can be harmed by the reduction of a 


burden? It may be a necessary burden, in so far as it pays for our 


security under government; but still is it not a burden? Its relief 
should be sought, and it should be consistent with the only proper 
object—revenue, not for hoarding or extravagance, but for unavoid- 
able expenses. _ 

I do not design to argue at length the nature of this burden. I 
am now, as ever, convinced that such a tariff as we have not only 
brings about serious conflicts between labor and capital but is re- 
sponsible for the high prices of manufactured goods; that it de- 
presses the labor market, and that it fosters trusts and combinations. 


In fact, every tariff from 1879 down to the present time, in so far as 


it was protective, injured both farmer and laborer, making farming 


less profitable in order to make the cost of labor to the factory 
| cheaper. 


: INTERNAL REVENUE. 
‘In remarking upon the tariff in 1882 I was very frank to contend 


that I would forego the opposition which I made to a resolution for 
the abolishment of the excise system. I was willing then to forego 

that opposition on the basis of a resolution which I offered in the 
- House, and which is there quoted. But I desired to abolish the in- 
_ternal-revenue system only as a system or mode of collection, not as 
to the taxation of certain articles. I was willing to see the tax col- 


lected by the States. I think now, as I said then, that it would have 


worked likeacharm. The protectionists were not, however, in fa- 


vor of reducing taxation by the tariff, but they were in favor of a 
hasty riddance of the whole internal-revenue system and its Federal 


mode of collection. I regarded the tariff which we sought to revise 
asa monument of war necessity and of subsequent treachery. It 


was promised to be reformed after the war when the internal taxes 
were reduced on home manufactures. 
I then inveighed against the Federal administration of the inter- 


-nal-revenue law and favored its abolition, because of its cumbrous, 
corrupt, and spying system. Its officers were then in the habit of 


| _ pursuing the offender into his cigar and tobacco shops, and into 


stills, breweries, and factories, with treats and promises, in order to 


Ee ae Ueda tes 


» ae ae yd Bee IP rh teh a 
ar ot Rees | Oe aLes 


984 : SAM UBL & COX Rios: * 


influence the voter in favor of the administration. Thanks to Dem- 
ocratic economy, that army of five thousand has since heen decimat- 


ed. Worse than the janizary or the mameluke, it undertook by its — 


occult machinery to intimidate and defraud; and I was willing to do 
away with it in the Federal system, as every speck of it on our body- 
politic was then a cancer. 


There has been no time since the discussion of the tariff of 1864 


when economic measures were before Congress that I have not pro- 


tested against their excesses, and have given the reason, which has — 
been verified, and that is that they would engender a surplus, which ~ 


was both corrupting to legislation and administration. At all times 
I have been willing to cut down the taxation to avoid this peril. I 
was willing to welcome any relief from this surplus. But since we 
could not tear away the octopus which was preying upon the people 
in the indirect form of taxation, I was even willing to take the direct 
form and thrust it one side, and the: more so because it was in the 
hands of the Republican party, who were using its emissaries and 
officers for an espionage not only in New York City, but elsewhere, 
for sustaining their corrupt practices and perpetuating their su- 
premacy. 

But this bill is before us. It concerns more a surplus than it does 
a tariff. The surplus is the principal object with me; the tax but 
the incident. If I cannot apply the reduction at one point, I will to 
another; but for the present I believe that the committee which re- 
ports this bill, considering all the varied industries of this country, 
have done the best possible with a view to successful-accomplishment 


of the great object—the reduction of taxation, so as to avert future, 


accumulations and avoid the paralysis of business. 


THE BILL NOT A RADICAL MEASURE. 


This bill proposes very little. The wonder is that so much noise 
has been made because of what it does propose. In round numbers 


it takes off but about $78,000,000—$54,000,000 from the tariff, and 


$24,000,000 from internal taxes. It adds to the free-list some articles 
of necessity, so as to reduce the cost of their manufacture and that 
of the commodity itself. 

The present average of the tariff on dutiable goods is 47.10 per 


cent. This bill, if passed, would leave it 40 per cent., and leave it 


still an enormons burden on production. 


NOT A FREE-TRADE MEASURE. 


Call this bill a free-trade measure! Why, it leaves the average | 
duty higher by 10 per cent. than under the law of 1862, which wasa _ 


ig FT Te a da MS rot es cra sah it ¢' ee When itt ut wer Uta por ae 
y PD Betas 20) 4 Ne Gay re oat hes | ; Nar gue 1 


~*~ 


SAMUEL 8. COX. | 985 


thorough war measure. Before the recommendation of the Tariff 
Commission it should hide its head, for that commission recommend- 
ed 20 per cent. reduction, which would have left the average less 


ee than will be left if this bill becomes a law. 


© RP oe bee Ue ie Oe Bere, 
oy i x £ Ma s 


If this bill be not passed and the matter is committed to the dis- 
cussions of the forum, where the people can hear homely and plain 
discussion, no one can tell the result when next it comes before a 
renovated Congress. [Applause. | 


OPPORTUNITIES AND ARTICLES TO REVISE. 


There are various articles from which a revenue could be wholly 
or partially dispensed that would benefit the whole community, and 
with least injury to our manufacturing interests. 

The amounts collected from these for the year ending June 30, 1887, 
are as follows: 


MUSA oes os eS ANG) Aerie Ving Sea ROG Wat die WEIS aka day eas ie $50,000,000 
EN Es yale oe ON OAs UNS Vokes a SEE WE Ue oa ok eem eneE 30,000,000 
merous MeO atthe artsy. i oy ieee ees t 2 Si Sea rees Relay gh aM 12,000,000 
MS MARS ere tikes Vis ef al Ud se SPORE Il lk d Hd tae eevee hace oN eens 5,700,000 
RIEU ONS oo ora: sco Hac inn Via halal Os eed o a)s wlont me's cue Miata were olye ele ae 5,000,000 
ROR eIEN EME Tiare tcieh, Selo Ge cee ON ele aikss Wu Sie See dia Uk Cid wisn ol eeviw bias 4,000,000 
Ream PO TRECEMLTACLUTOULS oc 1c gi a sinls ¢ osecale ele cole eae | alare dues sick meee 2,400,000 
URMILA aT OSAP AE ree LG el Cs cial sitel iw sai h 8's. ule aw ident wantinks 1,000,000 
Be Pad BAe SCRE A cialed o\eih =v cis-oo.0 «ie © Salem umn er pane’ 700,000. 
ME aca io ys Suse kN te avec) otin doe oy Gy ae OE 600,000 
Oe OCR eared Mes, get ee atelier Wid euk'e/s ons Veh cine e «> ewe pas 700,000 
ee emit er ie ra AUS Ae OM, Bee Tes wale Ha « SPC OR Cae 85,000 


-.. Ishould have been very willing, were there no other alternative, 
of taking off of this list the revenue proportionably, or almost in any 
. way, to prevent the menacing accumulations in the Treasury. From 
~ any of these articles, especially sugar, tobacco, lumber, wool, coal, 
and salt, which are used by the masses more than almost any other, 
I would, in an emergent condition of our business, be willing to 
make reductions. Salt is a necessity for our dairymen, and used by 
our meat and fish packers. Coal is indispensable to our factories. 
‘kumber should be free for building purposes, and we should as a 
‘sanitary measure save our forests. Chemicals should be free, as 
_ free as the raw material of our woolen fabrics. Besides, the relief of 
chemicals would benefit our soap and other manufacturers. And 
alcohol should be free, because used in the arts and manufactures ; 
_ their relief would be a boon to many of our lesser industries. A 
- great relief would be given also in the matter of clothing, because 
at least 50 per cent. more for clothing and biankets is paid in this 


country above that paid in other countries. Here are the percent- 
ages of taxation on several articles which are necessaries, and from 
which some selections for relief might be made: 


Tax on sugar........ Ride bids te nisi mens ocala be os 'wid ojaiwb g's tienes aint gare aa 80 es 
PRX OW TIC 3S 5 oes Ve a ain mn 9's a. tie. awe sw eb wien oot Pam 9.0 608s wap ale ae 112 
TDA OW BAGG co oe sew ve a 6 Bn ose. #19 Bie «90s oreo Wisin: mises eb ph ala abei Sle kus te okt tee 83 
TBX/DD COPD SEAPCH. 655.55. 5 a5 0:0. aiee es 9.0 sieiececmivinle) sla eth iee. onns sees ee ne 93 
AX OM DOUBLOES oo. os bs 3 ds 0 b,n:pis 4x ee’ bs) aimee shee pla spas ee etek ee 45 & 
Tax on woolen dress goods costing 22 cents a yard. ............eeeeeees Tine 
aK OD COMIBON CLOLD Sh. os e's «<n occ vie o> abeiisiin'sl to We 5-6) 9 n'a nia al eee: 
PAX OD. WOOIEH NOSIELY.. oo oes oie cc 6 csves 00s 4 # a's se owls cb cle a euainiee ein 70 
Lak On BUANOISSs = 02 Los viceteloe eles dee'e ote woes 40 Se ne nis ee ge 72 
‘Tax.on common woolen Shawls. ics. 25 ie sce. cbc eee bs «sk cei 1S hice eee 87 
Tax On cotton VOSMELY oS. Se ces ve ere «Seine ok pes ots 02's bee ae Ad . 
Pax on cotton: DabpIN G72 Choe sa oS dee ees 6 bee 4 obs os 9 0s. e ee ae 54 
Taxon plain earthen wares 70.2). os a sss eek ae nae sake tee bes eaten een 55 
Maxon AWANGOW-P1assy oS eee ee A ary ae ope ob ts ee 86 
Pe xyOU DIALE-D188S -. 5.5. oe at's SNe’h oO awe alge gatas aw eg Ok ete a A ees 147 
TBS ONALOCL TALUS. . 16-0565 osc oye, oh wide ble BN WEA y 06 Bivins oe aw ete gee 80 


Doubtless, in the finality of this bill, when it comes to a confer- 
ence, considerations of this nature may be paramount, but for the 
present, whether this bill is amended or not to suit my views or that 


Per cent. 


of my constituency, I will give my vote, heart, and mind to its pas- 


sage. 


MAXIMS OF TAXATION. 


Writers on political.economy have laid down maxims which are 
almost classical for the accomplishment of taxation. These are de- 


veloped by John Stuart Mill, in his Fifth Book and second chapter, 


to be: 

First. That the subjects of every State ought to contribute to the 
support of the Government as nearly as possible in proportion to 
their respective abilities. Otherwise it is inequality. 

Second. Adjust the time and manner of the payment, and the 
amount of the tax, with certainty, so that the tax-gatherer should 
not become insolent or corrupt. 

Third. The convenience of the tax-payer; among which is reckoned 
taxation paid by the consumer of an article, little by little, as he has 
occasion to buy the goods. He should be at liberty to either buy or 
not to buy, as he pleases. In this he pictures our own tariff system. 


And fourth, which is more to our purpose in this discussion, that. 


every tax ought to be so contrived as both to take out and to keep 


isda: 


SAMUEL S. COX. ie 287 


out of the pockets of the people as little as possible over and above 
what it brings into the Treasury. 
. Under this head is discussed the diversion of a portion of the 
_ labor and capital of the community from a more to a less productive 
employment; and in this, too, he speaks appropriately as to our own 
‘system. 

But above all there should be equality as the rule in taxation as 
in all other affairs of government. [Applause.] The sacrifices which 
taxation requires should be made to bear as nearly as possible with 
the same pressure upon each and all. It is equality of sacrifice. It 

means the apportionment of the contribution of each person toward 
the expenses of the Government. This standard is one of perfection. 
It cannot be completely realized, but it is necessary in discussion to 
know what perfection is. In other words, if we cannot in a debate 
of this kind find out the absolute truth and the perfect theory, we 
can do as the mariner does at sea when he loses his compass or his 
_ reckoning—he can sail by a star, if he cannot sail into a star. [Ap- 
plause. | 

These maxims may seem abstract. They may be placed within 

- _. the category of doctrine; but I hold now, as I have ever held here, 

4 that there can be no practicalness in our legislation unless we de- 
duce it from, or find it crystallized in, correct theory. The sneer 

against scholastics and doctrinaires comes from ignorance of the 
very philosophy of economy and legislation. 

The same law of induction by which Lord Bacon, after experi- 
ment, generalized applies as well to political as to physical science. 
It has been said that Lord Bacon in his Novum Organum made pos- 

gible the discovery of the circulation of the blood, the steam-engine, 
electric motors, and all those forms and forces of invention which 
have changed the industries of the world, and given to civilization 
its advancement. It is only when these laws are violated that man 
retrogrades, or if he does not retrograde he simply marks time and 
does not march. 

In all commercial transactions between two foreign countries the 
basis of exchange must be specie and the currency of the countries 
reduced to their par values. So when a man brought a hundred 
dollars’ worth of goods into this country he had to sell them at that 
time for $174 dollars of our currency, with freight and duties super- 
added. That amount I ascertained by taking the cost of American 
gold as compared with English gold. 

_ That state of things no longer exists. Nevertheless, by the same 
mode of demonstration you can find out precisely the moneyed ele- 
‘ment which enters into this tariff tax and which never goes into the 


hs - ie a 
1 AL ERIE rat Od hare 
ae he a ee ee _ 


a | SAMUEL 8. OOX. 


Treasury of the United States. These elements of cost upon mer- 
chandise imported from foreign countries are, first, cost abroad; 
second, the difference of exchange; third, the duty; fourth, freight, 
insurance, and other charges of importation; and fifth, the im- 
porter’s profits and all the preceding items, which we reckon at 10 
per cent. 

Now, it is precisely at this point of cost that the imported article 
comes in competition with the corresponding article of the home 
manufacturer, and the aggregate of all the items above men- 
tioned constitutes the protection which the tariff system gives to 
the manufacturer. The consumer of the domestic article, of course, 
pays this bounty, in addition, to the manufacturer. No man fa- 
miliar with political economy pretends to dispute this axiom. No 
man pretends to dispute the proposition that the object of a tariff for 
protection is to increase the price of the article; else who would care. 
for protected bounties? Not the manufacturer, certainly. If not. 
he, who then ? 

In order to verify a posteriori from the facts the cost of the 
taxed articles in addition to the tariff, I obtained the bills of 
lading at our custom-houses on pig-iron, bar-iron, cotton, and woolen 
manufactures, etc., which will be found in the Globe of June 2, 
1864. 

I was almost afraid in that debate to show what the cost and 
bounty of these articles were when they reached the consumer. It 
was almost incredible, especially when aggravated by a depreciated 
money system. 

Of eleven principal articles imported from abroad upon this basis, 
and reckoned upon the basis of standard gold currency of the United ~ 
States, I could not resist a conclusion that there was an average of 
over 60 per cent. in the shape of a bounty to home manufactures. 
And I deduced this conclusion: 


Think of it! For the iron which we use in all its varieties of adaptation : 
for the cotton we wear, whether printed or plain, in the calico dress or the 
shirting; for the wool in blanket, carpet, or clothing; for the newspaper, 
book, and pamphlet; for the leather we use when tanned or manufactured 
into boots and shoes; for the clothing we buy already made up; for the 
soap and candles and India-rubber goods,—for these only under our tariff of 
1862, and not counting our recent increase or the proposed increase of this 
bill, we pay as gratuity to one class of persons the enormous sum of $700, 
250, 282. 

Will any one pretend that all this is for revenue? What! when the tariff 
does not raise one-tenth of that sum on all articles of importation? What, 
then, is this $750,250,252 paid for? Not for war, not for debts, not for ex- 


SAMUEL 8. COX. | 289 


venses. Is it possible that we have to pay on some ten articles only, in paper 
money, $750,000,000 to get less than $50,000,000 of revenue from them? 


I use these figures simply to show the method under the tariff of 


i 1862, and not for the purpose of showing what the present tariff, 


with its 47 per cent. duty, levies upon the people; but to show the 
immense sums paid by the consumer which never get to the 
Treasury of the United States, but go as bounty to the home 


‘manufacturer. 


Deducting the 60 per cent. for depreciated paper money, then, on 
the amount thus ciphered as bounty on the articles named, and you 
have, to get $50,000,000 into the Treasury, a bounty of $300, 000,000. 
This is a stupendous outrage. [Applause.] 

Is not the President, therefore, correct as an economist and wise 
in his foresight as a statesman when he says: 

That the tariff readers it possible for those of our people who are manufac- 
turers of certain articles which are protected and taxed to sell them for a price 
equal to that demanded for the imported goods that have paid the customs 
duty? So that it happens that while comparatively a few use the imported 
articles, millions of our people who never used and never saw any of the for- 


eign products purchase and use the things of the same kind made in this coun- 


try, and pay therefor nearly or quite the same enhanced price which the dnty 
adds to the imported articles. 

But how small is his reckoning of the amount which never sees 
the Treasury which is a part of the tax upon the consumer. He says 


that those who buy the domestic article pay a sum at least approxi- 


mately equal to the duty to the home manufacturer. If I am cor- 


a rect, the sum thus paid is five or six times the amount of the duty. 


[Applause. ] 
CHEATING BY STATUTE, 


It will not be doubted that it is an under-statement, that to get 
$200,000,000 into the Treasury it costs $1,000,000,000. If this be not ac- 
cepted as true, then go to the custom-houses and inquire for the bills 
of lading. When you find out the fact as I did, you will not wonder 


at the diabolism of the tariff; you will not wonder that the father of 


all sin and lies is the father of the tariff. [Laugbter.] Members 
grow indignant at the percentages levied on the necessaries and the 
immunity on the free-list of luxuries; but they grow reconciled 
when itis known that these sums go to carry on government. They 
are reasonably content with them, even though they create a sur- 
plus and endanger values and credits. But this is not the head 
devil in the business. Our tariff makes horns and hoofs free, while 
it taxes the Word of God. The devil is in that, but only a little 


4 


icy SN RR NEN wate Me sae SA, % Soca PoE 2 Sa Pastiod wr Salta es mg 7 eh. zoihes iat tyes Mie eu Bao are A Cod eit 0) ate ~ “Sh \ 
are eae Me thar A es on See eT Rt ge PAP Ge) MARE ie en) aah Seay sea ee ae St eee Cay pap oF Ce maw te at be 
Be eee Sa a a Menara ig nc eR ey GeO RRIBE A MBN aM py aa Rh SPS ee ae ear ea 43, 
; ¥ ys Ge . 4 Biel sali iglesia ion Bie sa p h 
Se ¥ ~ t 3 at 


uaF arb hay! ws 


MOF SAMUHE S. CGks es 


devil. It is when he adds to the tax that goes to the Treasury the 
robberies outside that the worst begins. Do you deny this result? I 
give you a touchstone to test it. 

We import, say, $400,000,000 a year of the protected goods, and 
pay an average of 47.10 per cent. on them. Alongside in the mer- 
chant’s store are the competing American goods. They are 47.10 
per cent. higher than they would be sold outside of the United 
States. And since they are five times the value of the foreign goods, 
in dollars, we must pay $5 tax to the protected manufacturer where 
we pay $1 to the Government. Any woman who buys Irish linen in 
Cork, or a shawl in Paris, will know when she brings it in the un- 
happy fact. It is sometimes true, as this debate develops, that 
American goods are cheaper over our own borders. They have to 
be sold in foreign markets, and to compete they must be undersold. 

The devil is never dressed up so elegantly as when he appears as 
a protectionist. . 

Oh! how is the devil dressed ? 

He is dressed in his Sunday best, 

With his scarlet coat and breeches of blue, 

But there is a hole for the tail to come through. 

[Laughter. ] 

It is said that when the devil walked the earth in full dress he 
took most delight in seeing a cunning old lawyer ‘‘ cheating by stat- 
ute.” [Laughter.] If he had only known the complicated machin- 
ery of the tariff, ad valorem and specific, mixed in his own dress, 
by the square inch and by the threads, he would have enjoyed far 
more the legislative cheat.. (Laughter. ] 


A FORM OF TYRANNY. 


And now, I ask, where under our Constitution; where, by the 
laws of nature; where, by the laws of Providence, is the warrant to 
thus violate the rights of property? Governments may seize prop- 
erty, the property of individuals, by mere arbitrary act. This, says 
Dr. Wayland, is a form of tyranny with which all the nations of 
Europe of old were too well acquainted. 

But— 
he says— 
the same thing is done by unjust legislation. That is, when legislators, how 
wellsoever chosen, enact unjust laws, by which the property of the part, or the 
whole, is unjustly taken away, or unjustly subjected to am oppressive taxation. 


Frequently since that time I have had occasion to pursue the 
same methods of argumentation in relation to these peculiar modes 


SAMUEL 8. 0OX 901 
of public oppression. I have learned these rrinciples in connec- 
tion with economy, not from slave-owners, or Southern statesmen, 
or members of the Cobden Club, but from a teacher whom I rever- 
ence and who belonged to New England. He warned us in our 


- college days to beware when the antidote to evil became the source 


of evil; when society itself set the example of peculation; when pub- 
lic injustice became the prolific parent of private violence. He told us 
the result as he had gleaned it from history, to which he applied his 


- irrefragable code of morality. That result was, that capital, immi- 


gration, and production ceased, and a nation either sinks down in 
hopeless dependence, or else the people, harassed beyond endurance, 
believing that their condition cannot be made worse by any change, 
rush into all the horrors of civil war. The social elements are dis- 
solved, the sword enters into every house, the home ties which bind 
men together are'severed, and no prophet can predict at the begin- 
ning what will be the end. 


ILLUSTRATIONS FROM BAD TRANSPORTATION. 
Let me make a homely illustration. I heard it in the class- 


~room,-from Dr. Wayland; and toit Mr. David A. Wells has added 


his own piquant observation. It refers to the interchange of com- 
modities and to transportation. If transportation be difficult, it 
adds to the cost of the article to the consumer, just asa tariff or 


- tax. _Whenever you diminish the abundance of things which min- 
ister to our necessities, itis like interposing a desert, swamp, an un- 
bridged stream, or a bad road between producer and consumer. 


Novroad at all; itis a prohibitory duty. Twenty per cent. duty is like 
a bad road; 30 per cent. is a corduroy road [laughter]; 40 per cent. 
like a broad, deep, and rapid unbridged river, and 50 per cent. like a 
swamp flanking the river on both sides, while 100 per cent., such as 
levied upon steel rails, blankets, and window-glass, is a band of 
brigands who strip the merchant of nearly all he possesses. He 
should be grateful to God that he escapes with his life. [Laughter 
and ppplaee: 

___ LOGAL INTERESTS. 


cy do not “complain of gentlemen desiring to help th their onal inter- 
ests. Truly it requires a little sacrifice to vote for the general weal 
when it causes a particular home woe. Local color in art gives 
grace to picturesqueness. Our polity has as a presiding genius 
autonomy. Let us respect it, but let us not carry it to such excess as 
to make the removal of general wrongs impossible. Statesmanship 


should study how best to reconcile the jarring and diverse industries 


of our extensive land. 


yy 
bo a geen ie ee : wie 


999 SAMUEL 8. COX. 


_ Members admit that there are certain productions that upon prin- 
ciple should not have protection ; but they declare that they will make 
reprisals for the clamors and exactions of the tariff in other matters 
where they are unprotected. I have inveighed against this system 
as mutual brigandage and the reciprocity of robbery. [Applause and 
laughter. ] 

Our tariffs illustrate them in every paragraph. Kentucky wants 
cheap copper stills for her whisky. She gets even with the Michigan 
robber by demanding a tariff on hemp. Now hemp is to be on the - 
free-list, and why not copper? Maine steals on lumber to make up 
for the Massachusetts roguery on fabrics. 

Massachusetts howls for cheap coal; Pennsylvania says, no; and 
so Massachusetts goes out with a Home Market Club and knocks 
down the West and South, to rifle them of half their gains on raw: 
cotton. Tennessee, Virginia, and North Carolina, being fleeced all 
round in clothing, sugar, and what not, go for goobers at a cent 
a pound. [Laughter.] California demands a large reprisal for 
her lumber, because she is fleeced on salt by New York, West 
Virginia, Ohio, and Michigan. The Gulf States form a band of 
brigands, and march forth with precious little hope for any steal 
worth the powder; but being reduced to .extremities, they call on 
Fra Diavolo from Louisiana to lead against the robber gang of cut- 
throats on cotton-ties and trace-chains. Pennsylvania, the Robert 
Macaire of the lot, steals boldly on all articles from a plate glass to a 
locomotive; and to make up for the general loss, the Northwest 
masks herself behind her forests and demands timber reprisals; and 
soon. Nothing is sacred. Even the corsets of Connecticut, around 
which hover so many happy associations [laughter], or the brier- 
wood pipes of Knickerbocker are not safe form the interchangeable 
piracies of the tariff. [Laughter and applause.] Oh, the beauty of 
reciprocal rascality! [Laughter. ] 


IS IT ROBERY, OR WHAT ? 


Gentlemen seem to take umbrage because we call these tariffs 
which take from one class to give to another robbery. But I havethe 
best ethics for the statement that the right of property is violated by 
the individual by cheating, stealing, robbery, or violation of con- 
tract; and universally, just as these crimes prevail, production 
languishes, industry diminishes, and the richest soil fails these few 
and impoverished inhabitants. But* when Government lays its 
powerful grip on the property of the citizen to bestow that property 
on favored enterprises, it is none the less robbery because done 
under the forms of law. es. 


pt pi 0 ie ata Dit at heh, Mel eas tc eee Oar rahe, Sere OR, Ge: 
SAMUEL 8. COX. 293 
The gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Butterworth] says it is not a tax, 


only a ‘‘trade regulation.” [Laughter.] In this he differs from 
every writer upon political science. Iam inclined, notwithstanding 


- the euphemism, to call it otherwise. [Laughter.] The suave ex- 


pression ‘‘trade regulation” sounds pretty, but it is all the same a 


tax and something worse. 


IS IT BURGLARY? 


But stop! I should apologize. I must be decorous. [Laughter.] 
It is not robbery. Since the tariff forces taxes from one person to 
give to another by indirection, by a sleight-of-hand manipulation, is 
it not merciful to call it by another name than robbery? Ah, sir, it 
is done in the night season. [Laughter.] It is done against the de- 
fenseless victim when he or she is asleep and in their homes. Some 
folks would call it burglary. [Laughter and cheers.]| But I must be 
parliamentary. [Laughter.] Therefore I call it a trade regulation. 
[Laughter.] I have read a volume by M. Huc, a Catholic priest, who, 
dressed in the yellow robes, traveled through Thibet. He made 


‘many graphic descriptions of the then strange land of the Grand 


Llama. Among other descriptions (I quote from memory) is that of 


an adventure in the Thibetan mountains. 


AN. EUPHEMISM—‘‘ TRADE REGULATIONS.” 
A brigand meets the priest upon the road. The brigand does not 


point a pistol at his breast nor draw a knife. He says with perfect, 


courtesy: 


‘Venerable elder brother! - It is cold to-day in the mountains. I 
would like the loan of thy cloak.” 

And again: - 

‘* Beloved friend, dost thou not see that I am tired with walking? 
Thy horse, if thou pleasest.” 

This is a ‘‘trade regulation” in the land of the Grand Llama! 
[Great laughter. | | 
- But the great bulk of our tariff larcenies is done in the night 
season; and if Dr. Wayland and other writers be correct beyond a 
eavil, these unequal, unlawful, and outrageous taxes are flat bur- 
glary. I beg pardon—I use again the language of my friend from 
Ohio, used in this House, and not in Canada—it is not even taxation. 
It is a little trade regulation by which Ohio is made magnificent and 
prosperous at the expense of our Southern brethren. 


SUN AND COAL. 


Gentlemen complain that this bill is a radical bill to ruin our in- 
dustries. How can this be so? Why, the sun and its kindred ele- 
ments are regarded as aliens against which we must have protection 


and prohibition. Coal is left off of the free-list, although ready to - 


drop into our ships from the cliffs of Nova Scotia, to give caloric to 
the factories of New England. 


I once had occasion here to improve upon one of Bastiat’s fables 


so as to apply it to our country, but I did not then know that the 
story had a basis in fact. M. Rouviere, late prime minister of 
France, in a speech in 1882, I think, said that the tallow chandlers of 
France—good, kind, simple protectionists—petitioned the chamber 
of deputies to suppress gas. Why? Because it would ruin their 
business. 

With this new light I beg to repeat the analogue, with my own 
comments, and to print Bastiat’s petition as an addendum to my re- 
marks. 

M. Bastiat’s petitioners desired to suppress sunlight. They were 
protectionists of the genuine type. They demanded that the author- 
ities should close all windows and sky-lights, inside and outside, all 
shutters, curtains, blinds, bulls’-eyes, openings, chinks, clefts, and 


fissures whereby the sun enters to the disadvantage of the manufac- ~ 


turers of wicks, snuffers, street-lamps, extinguishers, and the pro- 
ducers of oil, tallow, resin, and alcohol. [Great laughter, | 

‘No cheap and plentiful light from abroad for us,” they cried. 
[Laughter.| Let us have petroleum against the external competition 


of daylight. Light is an uppish, solar foreigner, and should not rival - 


the coal-gas from Pennsylvania. [Laughter.] Light is alien. It is 


cheap, pauper labor. [Laughter.] It inundates us half the time. 


Your Joshua is a protectionist. [Laughter.] He would have it stand 
still that coal and gas be high-priced. [Laughter.] The market for 
gas, candlesticks, and gas-burners should not be disturbed. Oh, no! 
For is not light a secret enemy, purchased with foreign gold? 
[Laughter.] Quench it, and artificial light will be gorgeous and 
bountiful, though dear. How many domestic industries does not the 
prism destroy? It saps the foundations of agriculture, for is not 
tallow from the sheepfolds of my friend from Vermont [Mr. Stewart]? 
[Laughter.] It destroys the oil market, plugs the gushing wells, and 
interferes with transportation. It throws out of employment werk- 
men innumerable; it reduces the wages of such as are left. Under 
this policy of free light, what becomes of what is left of the whaling 


ae 
SS . 


SAMUEL 8. OOX. a Oe 


industries of New England? Who protects the heroes of the har- 
poon? The very bronzes, glidings, crystals, lamps, and spacious 
saloons of the rich are useless half the time because illumined by the 


proximity of the sun. 


Let us build an opaque roof, ribbed with steel, over the land. 


[Applause and laughter.] What matter the expense? Every Ameri- 


can coal-bunk and American mine will furnish the material for an 


American-made gas-retort. No gratuites of nature, no natural 
wealth. Give labor a chance. [Laughter.] Let manufacture thrive. 
Down with the sun! Imprison electricity! Up with old chaos and 
darkness! And while cheap foreign labor is forbidden in its prod- 


ucts at the custom-house forget not also to bar out from Castle Gar-. 


den the cheap foreign laborer who comes thither with light in his 


_ eye and iron in his-blood: for is not light and iron an alien to the 


protectionist? [Applause and laughter. ] 


PEANUT INDUSTRY AND THE SON OF AFRICA. 


The raiser of peanuts, by a parity of reasoning, protests against 


the free importation of that article. It is consumed by my little 


Arab constituency of the Bowery. [Laughter.] I must regard them. 
Because the same article is raised by those whose cheap labor is 
evidenced by the clothesless condition under Afric’s burning sun—let 
peanuts be protected! Why not? The same philosophy applies to 
the salt made abroad by solar radiance and evaporation. The sun 
is a cheap laborer, and although we have a sun shining over our own 
Onondaga in New York, it has not the calorific properties and chro- 


_- mic results of other suns, in other lands, which have laid away vast 
mines of these saline crystals in the bosom of the earth. 


There is coal, too. Why should it not be protected or restricted 


_. from abroad? Is it not the product of the sun and nature? 


bee 
Tat “ine 


THE SUN, CARBON, AND LOCOMOTION. 


One Sabbath George Stephenson saw a train flashing by with its 
long white plume of steam. Turning to his friend, he said: 

‘*Can you tell me what is the power driving that train?” 

‘‘ Well, is it not one of your big engines?” 

‘‘ Aye, but what drives the engine?” 

‘Oh, very likely a canny Newcastle driver.” 

‘‘ What do you say to the light of the sun?” 

“How?” asked the friend, s 

‘Tt is nothing else,” said the engineer. ‘‘It is light bottled up in 
the earth for tens of thousands of years—light absorbed by plants 


and vegetables—being necessary for the condensation of carbon durs 


= 
eit Sy 


406 SAMUEL 8. 0OX 


ing the process of their growth if it be not carbon in another form: 


and now after being buried in the earth for long ages, in fields of 


coal, that latent light is again brought forth and liberated, made to 
work as in that locomotive for great human purposes.” 
Was there no poetic beauty in the reality of this conception? 


Think of it. This sun power, equal to billions of horses, is not only 


every day providing fuel for some great locomotive emergency ctf 
the future, but it lifts up fabulous weights of watery vapor into the 
clouds, which return to bless the earth by giving form and color, 
fiber and juices, scent and strength, to tree and flower. 

These same sunbeams, when pressed into coal by the oonticien 
and ponderosities, and when mined and fired, become incentives to 
motion. They outstrip Apollo’s coursers of the sun. They move 
the fast flying-shuttles of interchange to create the tapestry of a bet- 
ter civilization. [Applause. ] 

Why should these natural and cheap workers for human happi- 
ness be laid under embargo and prohibited to our people? 


THE FRUITS OF THE EARTH—ARE THEY FREE? 


The same cogency of reasoning, patriotic love of a home market, 
and independence of foreign supply, especially in case of war, is illus- 
trated in a petition sent to this House by a Connecticut gardener 
from Glastonbury. Almost in sight of the Charter Oak his straw- 
berry beds give their succulent rubies to the sun; and the gun, 
through coal and Stephenson, harnessed a force to bear them to my 
constituents. But the Connecticut gardener is not satisfied with 


this nearness to the New York market. He demands that a heavy 


if not prohibitive duty be placed upon all foreign fresh fruits; 
oranges now taxed 25 cents a box; on grapes now 20. per cent. ad 
valorem, and bananas—and why? Because the consumer being 
satisfied with cheap foreign fruits fresh from the West Indies would 
discourage his strawberries. [Laughter.] He would embargo the 
ships of all lands where currants grow, and figs and dates are 
* sugared by the sun, in order to leave the yearning in the human 
oesophagus for the huckleberries of the Nutmeg State. [Laughter. ] 

By a parity of reasoning the anchovies and sardines of France 
and the raisins of Turkey should be prohibé in order to protect the 
Suckers of Illinois and the grapes of California. [Laughter. ] 

Truly, when we do begin our attacks upon nature and her pro- 


cesses it is hard to stop. It is the little end of the wedge for a 


potato, and then the result is a whole catalogue, including the gram- 
nivorous animals, the rhinoceros, hippopotamus, and elephant, to 
teach the children natural history. [Laughter ] 


Py 0 AA ae RSE Pa al wn Se tal ad o. Lee wRS i 
" aha pao re eae ea 22 eae ae “Ai 


FE: aon a ox 207. 


_ The present bill proposes to repeal the 10 per cent. ad valorem. on 
barks, beans, berries, balsams, birds, and bulbs. Who opposes this 
alliterative benefaction ? On barks? Some quack who has found a 

- root which may be ruined in the market for medicinal use. On 
beans? Some maker of castor-oil intended to relieve the infant in- 
dustry of the home market. [Laughter.] On berries? Some ba- 
trachian of the swamp who croaks for protection to his cranberries. 
Balsams? But why goon? The argumentum ad absurdum has no 
limit for the revision of such a tariff as we have. Let foreign nuts, 
and seeds, and weeds, and ‘‘ dried insects not edible,” be prohibited 
or restricted, for is not the country rich in hazels, and hickories, 
garden seeds, and jimson weeds, and who knows what industries 
chemistry may not evoke,out of these—our natural resources! 


“ INFANT SUCTION POWER. 


I am confused by the tabular opulence of our tariff speeches. 
We have tables on wages, tables on the homo market, tables on iron 
and lumber, tables on cotton and copper, tables on salt and wood- 
screws—tables on everything. Iam afraid we do not study them 
-heedfully. I will not make any tables; but I am studying’ statistics. 
I have made a calculation about our infant industries, and their 
power of suction from a maternal government. [Laughter.] Skip- 
ping the era from 1846 to 1860, during the existence of a good Demo- 
cratic tariff, I beg to develop some statistics. That suction power 
amounted to 10,441,000 horse-power. [Great laughter.] I prove it 
_ by showing the power of the fly in mechanics as a provocative to 
. force. [Laughter.] Taking the unit of power, which is 1 pound 
weight raised a foot, and the power which a horse raises 33,000 
pounds a foot in a minute, I thus get the one-horse power. My 
friend from Ohio [Mr. Butterworth], late Commissioner of Patents, 
will note my accuracy. [Laughter.] These are statistics. [Laugh- 
ter.|_ Then after the manner of our protectionists, I seek the census 
of 1880. [Laughter.] I desire the number of horses, oxen, milk- 
cows, mules, asses, and other cattle. [Laughter.] They number in 
the aggregate 48,095,807, from Alabama to Wyoming, all within our 
borders. I give a period of three months of the year for fly-time. 
[Laughter.| Then, I demonstrate irrefragably that these _live- 
stock for about ten hours of the day keep their tails in motion. 
(Laughter. ] I deduct as an uncertain factor the Texican steer, who 
uses his foot to kick vagrant flies from off of his ear [great laughter], 
and then I find that the forces thus expended and utilized, omitting 
the Texican steer, give me the premise, which I have seen somewhere 

in the speeches of the gentlemen on the other side, from which | 


bot 
fone wot a " : 
2 i a eg ae 


AG pe eS Lo 2g a “oes rae <i s ree See a tw oY : é at SS 3 e ™ ag OR ae? ee: 
* nas Saw > tute . : rw ? ~ ’ re 5 me = 
. 


998 SAMUEL 8. COX. 


deduce the untold suction power of our infant industries! [(Laugh- 
_ ter and applause. ] 

Through*this enormous and well-ascertained horse-power in fly- 
time I am enabled to gauge the amount of milk which Michigan 
suckles through copper, Pennsylvania through iron tubes, Massa- 
chusetts on cotton, New Jersey on spool-thread, Louisiana on sugar, 
Maryland on coal, New York on salt, California on blankets, Ohio 
on wool, and soon. Of course there is more or less struggling as to 
which infant should have the right of way [laughter] or the first 
pull at the pap. [Applause and laughter. |] 

It is said of the infant Hercules that when he was bnolslen 
by his mother he pulled so hard that he spilled the lacteal fluid 
and produced the milky way in the heavens. Hercules is Pennsyl- 
vania. [Applause and laughter. ] 


WAGES—SYLLOGISMS, 


I do not affect elaborate tables. They are so common as hardly 
to be read, especially when they reter to wages under the tariff. A 
table may show a low scale of wages for England, and a high scale. 
for the United States. But what does it prove? Let me reproduce 
here, in syllogistic form, these logical sleights of hand or mouth. 

Thus argues the protectionist: 

England has free trade; England has low wages. Hrgo, free 
trade produces low wages, 


Again: The United States has protection; the United States has 


high wages. Therefore protection produces high wages, [Laughter.] 

Now, one may very easily parody such chop-logic, thus: 

England has a House of Lords. England has low wages. Con- 
clusion: the Lords make wages low. _ [Laughter. ] 

Or, the United States is infested with tramps. The United States 
has high wages. Therefore tramps make wages high. [Laughter.] 

Ireland has no snakes. Ireland has low wages. <Av7ga/: Snakes 
make wages high. [Laughter.] 

Apply the same argumentto Russia. Russia has high protection. 
‘ Russia has low wages. Therefore protection makes wages low. 

Turkey—will gentlemen excuse for my reference? [Laughter.] 
Well, Turkey has a low tariff—8 per cent. Turkey has the Koran. 
Therefore the Koran makes wages low. [Laughter.] 

The truth is, as has been frequently stated on this floor, and 
proven, that wages are a matter entirely irrelevant to the discussion 


of tariff, depending upon the law of supply and demand, and the cir-~ 


cumstances, situation, and resources of the country. [Applause. ] 
I have discussed, very often here the relation between the 


q 


Ones SAMUEL 8. 0OX. : 299 


tariff and wages. I will not enter upon that further now, except 
to say that by the reports of our consuls, and notably the consul 
at Birmingham, Mr. Schoenhof, and by a comparison of tariffs 
and wages in other countries, it is safe to conclude that the tariff 
does not affect wages in the sense in which the Republicans claim it. 
No man can argue, however, from these relations between wages and 
prices and tariffs, as to the beneficial results to the people. , 


INVENTIONS, STANDING ARMIES, CONSUMERS, ETO. 


A country like ours, which has 250,000 inventions protected by 
the patent law, as my friend [Mr. Butterworth] so well recognizes, 
and with her artisans and laborers replete with intelligence and 
ability, need not fear competition from nations which have with- 
drawn, at great cost, millions of their productive citizens for stand- 
ing armies, The nations who compete with us have 1 man for every 
24 of the population in the soldiery; in the United States we have 
_ but 1 man in 1,610 of the population. 


HOME MARKET. 


When protectionists clamor for a home market they forget that 
_ «there is no standing army of consumers, but nearly all of our people 
are producers. They say: ‘‘We must have a home market; we 
- must consume all we produce at home, and produce only as muchas 
we consume.” : 

We do produce more agricultural products than we consume by 
five hundred millions worth a year. How can we consume these 
. products at home—in our country? It would require several millions 

more people who would consume only and produce nothing. But if 

more people do come in there will be more products still and a 
greater surplus. The proposed remedy only increases the surplus, 
and cannot diminish it, unless, indeed, we follow European example 
and keep a standing army of two millions of idle soldiery. [Ap- 
plause. | 

A liberal English statesmen—not a Tory—Sir Lyon Playfair, 
speaking of this condition of our country, points to the United States — 
as the great industrial nation of the future, and exclaims: 2s Luckily 
her protection policy is an incubus upon her industry, and gives us 
in England breathing time to prepare for the coming struggle.” 


NON-PROTECTED CLASSES. 
It has often been repeated here that the last census shows that of 
the 17,392,099 of our population engaged in industries, 7,670,493 are 
~ employed in agriculture; and, in round numbers, about 4,000,000 in 


A SEES Ora Ie GREE EON EN CPS A ENR PPC eae 
; 2 Fi ge ale 


ne . , - aver % my 


300  BAMUEL 8. COX. 


professional and personal services, nearly 2,000,000 in trade and trars— 

portation, and nearly 4,000,000 in manufacturing and mining. At 

least 1,214,023 are engaged in pursuits which are not benefited but 
rather injured by a high tariff. They are injured, I say, because 

the protective tariff, which is alleged to make high wages for others, - 
does not affect these. The pattern-makers, the bricklayers, the 

molders, the house-carpenters, and many other branches of business 

which are absolutely unprotected, command higher wages than those 

working on protected articles. 

There are nearly 400,000 carpenters and joiners, 300,000 milliners 
and dressmakers and keamstresses, nearly 200,000 blacksmiths, 133,- 
000 tailors and tailoresses, 102,000 masons, 76,000 butchers, 41,000 
bakers, 22,000 plasterers, and others engaged in other unprotected 
pursuits, who bear the burden without receiving the benefit of the 
favored class. 

Counting out the number of unprotected farmers, and over one- 
half of our entire population are dependent upon farms, I have be- 
fore me a list of trades and employments, which I will append hereto. 
It includes over one hundred classes, from the architect to the wood- 
chopper, who derive no sort of consequence, but whose business is 
crucified between the two thieves—ad valorem and specific levied 
upon all they consume. 

Here is a list of the number of our population engaged in non-pro- 

tected industries: 


PMPOTILOCIS Glee sd ok" s cs cow Coke bingent wate cee i ui5.s acre oe Te 3,375 
uriists and teachers Of Arts... cis oss oive c's coebk ot hutee chin. eee 9,104 
WAAICINON CESS 3c4 o's Goal5 0 tec do Pelee ee pre See c ebeteeaWial vote ao bet cre 2,331 
Barbers and hair-dressers........cccccsccccccccce veessee sl amen 44,851 
EPOUTOIUS NOUSE ACCOPICTS cAi.¢0'c'6 ds-0's aL nin bd bom CeCe ees cate srcccesty 19,058 
RUM VINO ire i 7lsunlo'h's hee ds ota seas sac Nee adee ie Sie bo 00's wees ie 64,698 
CHETKS ANG COPYIStS: o's eee tes ese ees ste scons Sore RE oo a 25,467 
EAN TOUPIS: sss pt ace 'cie wee o ban ca Tee eee 8 diese Wee ke ode ee 10,916 
LPL AEE CS TE a ALOR aban RE RI, IR as hae AL AN: areal vcaeaeee ee 5: 12,314 
Domestic servants .........0¢ © piv ab aie avis S's le wives ote tira es Stein ae eee 1,075,655 
Eimployés of hotels...........06 eV si00 @ sive wele§s p69 0.0% a wee ene wate 77,413 
CWP VON PINCCTS 5... oes ope p odip area's #4 eee beets Ohig mine Coen | gene 8,261 
PERE Bete ys. ve «<0! c'ale'u oe prion ae ron ay esis esses Bie eae ae ee nee 31,697 
PAO PORES IU oes. let Cee cc ees oe! AP er im dis bg ate eae 32,453: 
POUIMANIS I feces bss os oe ple i ¢.0.b 6.0/He Gia ov aie agile hus ee cay eee 12,308. 
TiNUOTOLE ss Cote he 08 OS Gime Sane ee Sdvind es 00 (A560 
PURO HUPESEES (OL OL the sg tc) oUau hae Shp ty cpeoee ts 006 tue 
DAWYOTR) Cc See ere Wilstinie seed beac Bee ee eid seen Lae 64,187 
Livery-stable keepers....... Yt diya tonies vopebesieve ret cuiatedeneie Tae 14, 213 


sd URL 8, cox, 


oe ea , eee OTe CEN Sew leit. Ay ise Pwr Pe tee ak Ee at Aire. <add s fate fm os meh ae 
ee ~ ed a 
; Ma Ac \ 
; 


\. 
Messengers...... PRG OR 8 Rae Sees le Ae epee eed alewigate’s 6 gs 
MVE TAS LPLSUASSET cel G ou Sse os wkd beat va bra ecw ss AS FP ee Re Pre Began ue 


_ Physicians and surgeons.......... be eek ay wieder ee goat Bene 


PESAUITALIL KECDCIS Ic o:4'oce oid ves .eie tun ae.e,e Sinpia swe gies ea ee ie Eel Om aceon 


‘Sextons eeeeneceeossee eseadee Keio etbie'e © se oe /sre 0 0 8 esere u_0.6 eeeeeoteeveeente 


Teachers and scientific TIETOOTIS iota aa ae Siels trea sists De 0 cele ryote ak 


Velerinary SUTZEONS. .. 0.0 occ ec cette cece ect eM cane vececcees 


MeVIVate WOEtCHINGl ict co cs cc ccc cwlnca ee ces e elile Se eR Puan Owes ous 
Whitewashers............ AE Sel ER SLE LIER tis Neth his ga Ba oA oh Se 
PURE AIL SWALOLINICHT eo ce seule ee oe cas ork y Se Coc pac tes tee 
Book-keepers in stores.......... Seba pea Ain le late he a Seg ARG TS SE : 
CI IRIGL el ies ee Ree oe a tie rae eke chess aed ccewene ie weet : 
Meer SA IBUOTER SUS AUN Se Sea ya cts sopdee Salerael. é Tha aeeds eae 


Clerks in express companies......... . CESAR LIEN FA odo eg ee a hey Wey 
Praymen aid teamsters. 0 os. Sess epls gees bake aie nce artia' aay 1 SSO 
UFESOWEN 11h WARECDOUSES. 215/6515 46:4) 5 wiocefiate es oa 0's i giars ead siws oem ee 


Perimioves Of tollroat COMPANIES! A556 koe oO kadds eve en comees tN yieiee 


CFSE ORs ROIS ce ie dine ak a CO Seb aR tx MR PPE SR, BOR ARCO i Yas 


DPE AiCeGAITICLS forse hi eld ec ike pecoemag ce cel aden weds weenns 


reeePAlirOdd CINPLOVES fascias cess tc pade sc udse sc es sete Calceecroe 
PeClcaTaply CMIPlOyessl. Foi sacs ee Se a eis ESOS US wie alee eae 
Telephone employés. Raa Rae aaa py aalopere’s Wis dele «hinge aly oe Cae a gree 


Reed ae hese eaten ease eRe ee LAE SAE ae cer ees eee wee 


PRGERIIIUOAN CL SAlCS WOMIEL LS tVas iss pi cath 6 Soutde Celetiva ce ees b heise cog 
Pep DALITICO T-ALL, WOMLON cg vale se ure calaiccs be ob oie Ole we a pine biaie dee Oe 


MMENETLT ELS IT CL | SLC WATUCESCS i oc rete old SLoc Cade eed de ches nena cleo 


SOE DCLS et ca ais oi dieu e] oe Sale Enie cls Sia\Bied die patie e Hale's Uae boeKe 
SRN EP Pe ea Marca woh atl 9 a Riv elie: Gene, meee: okn'fols Wik mer «neleree Gels tule ea 


rte Le 1 DOOKH ANG SLAUONOLY aise se 5 side cielees o ditsleime Caio’ ainee a 4 
See E a TT OOH AIL BOGS oss clea: fae 6 0 dake tare oie ere ad wlsiain'e eels S siqghe ee 


Meee TL WOO ITED COA! cists fateras ool a hee echig dneie Ga mab ey 6 be cs 
eMC ES MINCOLGGIE ANU TOUACCO oe oss a oS ccc eens scpeeleivecieest''s0,0 
See ARGRT peas oT en, Fels bare ceed 4 chine wee ce oon oe ae crass 
DRS PCIMUNG SAU POls. tee. dons cok cen snes tee varies nude aes diced ate 
Druggists....... Re ord gh ane At eb Spa A We es 1 J on DRA eee 
Dealers in real estate.......... he tihae sa asiss weiss ae's cals Cat eee te 


Dealers in provisions. .....cecescrccceve eoeoveosaeaeaee eeaeee e@eeveo0e8 


ney e 
eee See ‘ 

" D ate WS _ 
aa Pa ee ae a Pe 


4,328 


353,444 - 


1,856 
177,586 
5, 022 
236,058 


2,208 


4,982 


35,129 


302. “SAMUEL 8. 0X. eee 


Dealers in dry go0ds.......-.c+eecseere SR Pee es 
Dealers in groceries...... Se rea WANs RD Ae cob cene esa \LUieOae 
Dentera Ii Ton ANC tits «>see ss cine se sc ees eae pet cee eee 15,076 
PIGHIGIS 10 TUES EN swe Core tees ea ase ones sweat sb Lael Joa ac' ate 2,382 
Dealers in lumber and marble.... .......... Poke ete Ler rataeee <— 12,668 
Dealers in newspapers .........+. RoR oar Aig gh hore ie BPE pri ih as 2,729 
Deéalersin paints and “Oss. ss os. senses ss voc eeeetas meeeaiee ream 1,940 
TIGRIOISIN PADET. 5 Sess as ns de bicps vn ee owes be anew Meena Se Ayala ae 1,862 
PRACT Oe NG LS a aisle es ore 6 bobs Sais OS Shlee 6 HUIS Rhee e oilta etna 41,309 
WIRE ITS GTES hares C's a'o wed G's's 9 cid AG ww od eH olelely. mols Wocee toeen intel 172,726 
PAC LUG ADAKOIS soc. soo 3.5 Sad bb Eee Che eis ii see Gace ues eae ae 36,052 
PERG DULICETSS (50s sess acinus aoe eeeet ws soot Nain eu's ees siet nh ewinaeeene 2,587 
PISS WUNOCIS eh cae oh Adie sens oes se ees 5 eR See sas spits eee 10,804 
MS LIMNORS Sc we S scorch is ass Riot nls aw ENOek bie bioels Lina eye aie ee 76,241 
Carpenters alG- JOINERS. so). sai sccaec ce) ve cate suas ue ee eee ane eeean 378, 148 
Caer Keres oc cen oc ica count PS Sele whee Chee alae alwiaee She bie 4,708 
Chareoal anc-linié: burners. fe GSS Soe tone Se ee an erence ; 5,851 
COOODETS Sie c'e carob alc s be's wale Sek Sb ae Sb wate Cows e clntitioge eet ; 49,138 
Tummicers: Ane: firem Ci 4i5 Laas beieig ote oale eee Wide sia eels a esate sieeiaiene 79,628 
USE ERUMOTS 1500s bis ie Sisla <e'w nhs 0 9% Ta ag ps EAE Yee aS 5 yee ee 4,577 
Fishermen and oystermen............. o's Chie wale. ay sxiehnenaoe ee ean 41,352 
Per BLOT G: TAASONS 405 o/s'o.0s via ebrsie vases Weed mae doe ald obs eee 102,478 
ECT eer ceil Oe Shs odo a bid oa wid peo Clie ae als PEAS Slee ey eee 53,440 
ENOL 6 td o's ee aioe A RS ee sis octet asp la ein tore aa'es oat een 234,228 
Oil-well laborers...... Eanes nip taie tie nies amie sins we se cia aonb ae eee 7,340 
AIDEOER cL) ci vise ae o6 snlhic oe Pia eenaelee Rema eee > ous + 5 ames 128,556 
Paper-hangers....... «. RR Estes Seats s sin s'siapoa aks & ota cee ae 5,013 
Pe Ca OU CTA 36's a ee su be seis iv Selene Seven sikeis saree PP Beye c 9,900 
SLANUCPOES eS AWE wae 5 ob wie Seen Wee eae ole de ee ee eS aM ser abe PP ee 22,0838 
Printers and stereotypers ig Legions Rgip ale iatp eevrcees Pere ep: 712,726 
CQUALT VIED 1 ss occas c's 0 ¥ cib'e Poles Wiakes Vesee edislcis hassles cs teleereee 15,169 
Quartz-slaters....... ev eieises be eT nis aly Sts 46a ob aewete Py eres 4,026 
PiAVOMMAKETS As '0 35 ska ue a doaees yninia tie a'scu septal iteieaee Be ea: i 4,061 
DY OOLCHOD DOTS. «..'15 bn 7-050 5 8 Siow odie v biacela wv aeeinhe vole prsle'ke dea a6 ope aie 12,781 


It is this class of people that I have the honor in large part to rep- 
resent. They live in our cities, and though they may be largely en- 
gaged in manufacturing, according to our census returns, they are 
not manufacturing those articles which have the special favor of our 
tariff. 


DO NOT TAX WAGES. OH, NO! 
Gentlemen may tell us that they do not tax the wages of these 
men, whether high or low, by their tariff. 
I know that they do not tax their wages; but they tax all that 
their wages buy. They thus reduce the purchasing power of the lit- 


*: - 
Seer ie 
oe Sl She 


SAMUEL 8. COX. nee 308 


4 tle money that is left at the end of the week or month; for every 
article that enters into their expenditure, from the potatoes, taxed 
specifically 15 cents a bushel, tothe salt, at over 80 per cent., ad val- 


--orem, and from the rent of their houses, which is enhanced by the 


tax on lumber and wood-screws, to the blankets that give them com- 


- fort in the winter nights. 


INSECTS IN THE TARIFF, 


We have reports made by our Commissioner of Agriculture about 
every imaginable insect which preys upon our crops: The Hessian 
fiy, the army-worm, the weevil, and that latest pest called Hemiptera, 
or the family of Lygeide. [Laughter.] The gentleman from Ohio 
[Mr. BUTTERWORTH] understands this family. They have ‘‘ trade 


regulations ” of their own. [Laughter.] I may say that they are 


familiarly known as the ‘‘chinch-bug.” Efforts are being made to 

- dislodge these pests that destroy our grasses and our grains. Much 
money is expended out of our surplus for that purpose. Would it 
_. not be much better for the farmer if the same amount of skill in the 
treatment of certain little tariff insectivora and infusoria were in- 


_ vestigated so as to destroy them? 


4 Lam in favor of that kind of protection which is more in the na- 
ture of repeal than enactment. Where our game laws do not suffice, 
or our birds do not answer the purpose of destroying these pests, our 
reports tell us that a solution of common soap added to boiling water 
or korosene will have that effect upon chinch-bugs. Let us not be 
particular in the nature or quantity of the remedy. 
; LUXURIES AND NECESSARIES. 


Allow me to placein parallel columns a statement of a number of 
these insectivera. One column will show the luxuries of life, which 


come in free under the present tariff, and the other the duties on the | 


_ articles of necessity. And yet, for years and years in this House, 
gentlemen have refused even to consider the advisability of reducing 
- these taxes and. harmonizing their discordant elements: 


Duty on articles of luxury. 


Ottar of roses, free. 
Neroli, or orange-flower oil, free. 
~ Diamonds, 10 per cent. 
Raw silk, free. 
_ Jewelry, 25 per cent. 
_ Gold studs, 25 per cent. 
_ Finest still wines, in bottles, 29 per 
cent, 


Duty on articles of necessity. 


Castor-oil, 180 per cent. 

Linseed-oil, 62 per cent. 

Common window-glass, 87 per cent, 
Raw wool, 45 per cent. 

Steel rails, 85 per cent. 

Horseshoe nails, 116 per cent. 
Cheapest mixed woolen goods, cost- 


ing abroad 24 cents per yard, 77 _ 


per cent, 


eed SY ee Gangs, Mae eran Santer Se Rg ne 


304. | : CEES & Ox. 


Duty on articles of luxury. 
Finest thread lace, 30 per cent. 
Fine Aubusson and Axminster car- 
pets, costing abroad $2.77 a yard, 
46 per cent. 

Finest India shawls, costing abroad 
say $20 a pound weight, 35 cents 
a pound and 40 per cent. ad val- 
orem, or say 404 per cent. 

Silk stockings, 50 per cent. 


Finest broadcloth, costing $5 a 
pound abroad, 35 cents a pound, 


and 40 per cent., equal to about 


41 per cent. 


Pate de foie gras, 25 per cent. 
Musical instruments of all kinds, 
25 per cent. 


Duty on a quart bottle of cham- 
pagn, costing abroad $1 a bottle, 
~ 58 cents. 


~ Curry and curry powder, free. 
Olives, green or prepared, free. 
Spices of all kinds, free. 


Duty on articles of necessity. 
Spool thread, 51 per cent. 
Common druggets, costing abroad 96 
cents a yard, 86 per cent. 


Common woolen shawls, costing 
abroad 68 cents a pound, 86 per 
cent. 


Common worsted stockings, costing 
26 cents a pound abroad, 73 per 
cent. 

Common cloth, costing 65 cents a 
pound abroad, duty 35 cents a 
pound, and 35 per cent. ad valor- 
em, equal to 89 per cent. 

Rice, 106 per cent. 

Galvanized wire smaller than No. 16 
and not smaller than No. 26, wire 
gauge, 182 per cent.; smaller than 
No. 26, 155 per cent. 

Duty on a dollar’s worth of bleached 
cotton fabric, costing abroad 54 
cents a square yard, 664 cents. 

Potatoes, 15 cents duty per bushel, 

Corn starch, 85} per cent. duty. 

Salt, 85 per beat duty. 


AMERICAN IDEAS, NOT FOREIGN. 


Our American statesmen from the earliest days to the present who 
have not been wise in economy have not been accustomed to swear 
- in the words of any masters from abroad. . 
In the Principles of Trade, which appeared in 1774, two years . 


before Adam Smith wrote his Wealth of Nations, it was asserted — 


that commerce should be as free between all nations of the world as 
it was between the several counties of England. 

Franklin’s letters of 1778 were of the same tenor, namely, that 
our tariff should be for revenue only. Jefferson, as minister to 


France, was then advocating free trade. 


He recommended that 


commerce be relieved of its shackles in all parts of the world. 
Gallatin opposed protection very soon afterwards in Congress. 


HONEST DEFINITION OF FREE TRADE, 


As early a8 1831, William OC. Bryant argued for the liberties of 
interchange, and up to the final triumph, in 1846, when the tariff, in 


the language of Senator Allison, was as 


‘perfect a tariff as any we 


a rr ital ene Ys sce RENO ee Teor ORS ee NATE, SEO 
cS SAMUEL 8. 00%. * O0B 


ever had” [applause], protection had no more strenuous opposers 
than the men who, like Emerson, in the very midst of the war, spoke 
_ of it as in the interest of all nations. 

These men did not undertake to convey the idea that free trade 
was the abolition of custom-houses, nor the substitution of direct for 
indirect taxation. In the language of a representative protectionist 
paper, the Philadelphia American of the 7th of August, 1884, they 
held that it meant such an adjustment of taxes on imports that the 
entire revenue of the country should be thus collected, and so long 
as it did not lay its duties in such a way as to lead any one to under- 
take any employment or make any investment he could avoid in the 
absence of such duties. 


NEVADA .TO THE RESCUE—THE IRISH VOTE. 


The gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Woodburn] undertook, as he 
said, to filupagap. He filled one. [Laughter.] He thought that 
_ the President’s message was a British document, but not having the 
testimony on that head complete from the internal evidence of the 
document itself, he rushes to London and invokes the Cobden Club 
_ to his assistance. He made many apocryphal statements in relation 
to it, and quoted that enemy of Ireland and America—the Tory 
organ—the London Times, as evidence that the Democratic leaders 
of this country were horrible free-traders. He revamped the old 
story of British gold which is to be used in America for the Demo- 
cratic party and its success. He found in the membership of the 
club an army of dukes, and the Lord knows who, and drew the 
-- inference that with their ‘‘three guineas apiece” they were going to 
subdue America and overturn the Republican party [laughter] and 
things generally! Goodness gracious! Whole ocean into tempest 
tossed to waft a feather and to drown a fly! [Laughter.] He was 
careful to omit the names of the distinguished Republican leaders, 
who are, of course, in the conspiracy against themselves! He 
became so confused as to the name of the Secretary of War that his 
mistake naturally produced ‘‘ great laughter and applause,” which 
should have been reconsidered on the statement of the gentleman 
from Massachusetts [Mr. Cogswell] that it was quite another 
Endicott! 

Among others whom he named as members of the Cobden Club 
were some of the most liberal men in American politics upon both 
sides, including the Speaker of this House and several Senators. 

Now, what was the objective point of all this logical debate on 
the Mills bill? It was the Irish vote. [Laughter.] 

The gentleman.was careful to let the House know that he was 


= 


ey Sey eee eee ee ee ee, a ee ee ee ee ae ae oe , 
NTE ao te = 08 aes eae Ae. at 


306 SAMUEL 8. COX 


born in Ireland. Our Congressional Directory had already indicated 
that. Butif I should pursue the method pointed out by a scientist of 


Dublin, Dr. McElheran, I think I could denationalize the gentleman, | 


[Laughter.] That distinguished doctor showed that the way to test 


a true Celt was not by the place of his nativity, but by his features 


and name. The Celt has a handsome eye and a graceful figure, 
while the Angles and Saxons—as Defoe held—were the mud of all 
the races. Of course I would not apply such a remark by the author 
of Robinson Crusoe to the gentleman from Nevada, although perhaps 
he deserves it for his baseless attack upon Mayor Hewitt. Of course, 


since the statement as to our mayor has been refuted, he will make — 3 


the amende. - We will give him time. [Laughter.] 

The gentleman may have been.born in Ireland. I once heard an 
Irishman say, ‘‘ Because a baby is born in a stable it does not follow 
that he was a colt.” (Laughter.] It is well understood by physiolo- 
gists that such men as Shakespeare and Sir Isaac Newton, by their 
lineaments, are ascertained to be Celtic in their origm. Cromwell 
and his confiscators left quite a spawn in Ireland; and some of them 
have claimed to be of the pure stock. But they are not. They are 
not the O’Callaghans, the Murphys, the O’Conners, the O’Shaunes- 
seys, and the Sullivans [laughter], of the O’Neills, whose royal lineage 
is honorably upheld by my friend from Missouri who sits near me. 
[Laughter. ] 

When a member makes profert of himself, in order to reproach 
others, he must take the consequences, even if they,be both philologi- 
cal and physiological. ‘‘ Wood-burn”—what does it mean and where 
did it come from? There never was a better Saxon word than wode 
or wudu; it is a wood. It signifies when an adjective ‘‘mad,” 
‘‘furious” [laughter], because wild animals lived in the woods of 


Denmark or Friesland. Burn is thoroughly Saxon. It is from 


biernan. I surmise that the gentle defender of Tories from Nevada 
was either descended, most honorably of course, from some lordly 
Saxon charcoal-burner, or that the name came from some of the 
Cromwell folk who burned all the woods they could not confiscate 
when they invaded Ireland. 

Names are not much in a debate, but as the gentleman has spread 


my middle name—Sullivan—on the Record I must analyze that alsoa — 


little invreturn, by saying that Sullivan is from the Latin ‘‘ Sol” and 
‘‘levant.” Sun Rise! [Laughter.] My ancestor came from the 
Kast. I went back as his reflux wave. [Laughter.] I may mention 
confidentially that one of my ancestors carried a hod at the building 
of Solomon’s Temple. [Laughter.] All I know of the family is that 


i 
; 
; 
j 
; 


a recent ancestor came over from Ireland with Lord Baltimore. He 


- wasin good company. I need not enlarge further. 


_ There is another test of Celtic blood to which I may refer, as it is 


so pertinent to the Mills bill. The gentleman from Nevada will be 


pleased to know that his championship of the Tory protectionists of 
England indicates that he leans toward, if he does not belong to, the 
bluest blood of the landed aristocracy of England. 


Evidently the speech of the gentleman was made for the purpose 


of prejudicing the Irish against the Democracy, by reason of their 
dislike to their English oppressors. But his arrow falls far, short of 
the mark. 
The gentleman was pleased to say something complimentary of 
_ myself as a member of the Democratic party, and referred to me as 
a representative of a cosmopolitan constituency in a cosmopolitan 
city. He spelled my name at full, and more than intimated that I 
became a member of the Cobden Club, a ‘‘nobleman’s foreign asso- 


ciation,” as he phrased it. 


This remark of the gentleman from Nevada seems to have been 
well received by the House. Tobe more exact, let me quote his 
language: 


At the same time, to my utter astonishment, I find one of the foremost men 
of the Democratic party, a distinguished author, wit, and humorist, a Repre- 
sentative of a cosmopolitan constituency in a cosmopolitan city, Samuel Sulli- 
van Cox, became a member of the noblemen’s foreign association. 


By the brackets I notice, though I did not hear the speech, that 


_ this was received with laughter and applause. 


Tam at a loss how to discriminate. I have no special vanity, but 


oe I suppose the applause was intended for myself as a foremost Demo- 


erat, author, wit, humorist, and Representative [laughter], and the 


laughter was at the gentleman’s expense for associating me with 


noblemen, as such people run nowadays I in and out of divorce courts 
in England. 

I am not altogether certain that the gentleman should be 
laughed at for calling me a nobleman. I have had some sort of 
a decoration given to me by a descendant of the Caliphs and 
the Sultans. But the nobility which I most admire is not that of 
mere title. I have almost forgotten my honors abroad; for I did 


- dearly yearn for the society of you gentlemen. [Laughter.] All the 


pride I have is to be a commoner along with other common folks 
here. [Applause and laughter.] 


I do not care even for the word ‘‘ Honorable” in this House. 1: 


have an ambition to be considered a good man and a faithful mem- 


Cw aie ea : ' : q d 
eg iy Foe Mma ole Soe BOS Dh SNE a 
(ORR Sy elem SARKIS RADIO ct RELY BIN Letina es Wh Ih ote bf ss 


—, eg ss 
eT te aR 


s * 

a ye 

LE FS cere 
res ee ee ee 


PAUUEE BOOK en eee 


308 SAMUEL 8. COX. * 


ber. Ihave nospecial desire to be considered either witty, humorous, 
or a littérateur. Whatever the House or the gentleman may have 
meant by their laughter and applause, I would commend to him the 
verse of Tennyson, where he says: 


Howe’er it be, it seems to me 

Tis only noble to be good ; 

Kinds hearts are more than coronets, 
And simple faith than Norman blood: 


(Cheers. ] 

And certainly no one ever merited this tribute of the laureate of 
England more than Richard Cobden, the yeoman’s son, the friend of 
America, and the defender of just economic laws. [Cheers. | 

When the gentleman prints my name Samuel Sullivan Cox in the 
Record he indicates something of my Celtic blood, but he indicates 
something better in my thought and service. 

I beg to say that I accept my middle name with considerable 
pride; for among the best men of the Revolution from New Hamp- 
shire were the two Sullivans, one of whom was governor of Massa- 
chusetts, and the other a general in our army. Both were the 
friends of Washington. The general not only was the first to wrest 
Fort William and Henry from the Tory government of England, 
but, after the Revolution was over, he signalized his bravery and 
skill by suppressing the Indians in Central New York, when they 
were allied with the Tories with which the gentleman is pleased to be 
allied. 

IT am not so proud of my middle name as I was, for when I re- 
flect that Boston culture has produced another kind of Sullivan, and 
that he ingloriously retreated from the beautiful land of France be- 
fore a, British foe, I am not proud to see my name parted in the 
middle. 

The gentleman from Nevada represents a little rotten borough 
which is held by a lot of silver lords. From his standpoint he 
chooses to defame the men who made the ‘‘ cheap loaf” for the poor 
Englishmen,'and who, as O’Connell expressed it, were engaged in the 
same sad work toward Ireland. The attempt is as futile as the at- 
tack of a microbe against the shaggy frontlets and pachydermatous 
hide of the American bison recently brought to this capital. The — 
gentleman’s State is supposed to bein the Union. With its forty-odd 
thousand inhabitants it has as much power in the Senate as New 
York with its six millions. Still, should he not cultivate something 
of the modesty which belongs to littleness, of which I am a com- 
mendable specimen, and not be too forward in attacking men who, 


A SAMUEL 8. OOX. 809° 


_ like Cobden and his corn-law repealers, and as Macaulay said of the 
Puritans, were the noblemen of nature by the imposition of a might- 

» ler hand? 

~ If the gentleman would produce the impression that those who 
have been named as members of the Cobden Club in their catalogue 

_are unfaithful to Ireland or to America, he had better correct the 
Record; at least so far as my name is concerned, for not only have | 
I defended her sons, and had passed resolutions of sympathy and of 
‘succor for the cause of Ireland and Irishmen who were imprisoned 
wrongfully, as the Record of this House will show, but I had the 
honor of making the motion, before a Democratic speaker, by which 
Mr. Parnell was accorded the privileges of this House for an address 

- upon the wrongs of Ireland. 

It would take more misrepresentation and innuendo than the 
Tory member from this rotten borough has shown to produce any 
impression upon the cosmopolitan constituency which I have the 
‘honor to represent. 

-__- By ancestry, by inclination, by virtue of long service here, run- 
ning through nearly thirty years, I never gave one thought of sym- 
pathy with the Tory leaders who sought to drive England to desper- 

ation by their protecting policies. 

_ The Tories of New Jersey, whence came my folk, were in alliance 

with the Hessian and the red-coat to drive‘the patriots of the Revolu- 

- tion into ignoble humiliation. They failed; but had this sympathy 
against the Liberals of England, which the gentleman stigmatizes, 
not existed at that time we might still have been an English depen- 

-dency, and the gentleman, if he had lived at all, might have been 
engaged in the constabulary force in Ireland to-day endeavoring to 

- suppress, under the orders of Tory Balfour, the enfranchisement of 

- the people of his native isle who are seeking for home rule. 

In picking out my name, had he looked over the list of the Cob- 
‘den Club a little more closely he would have seen the name of Gov- 
ernor Jacob D. Cox, a Republican gentleman and soldier. He was 
an honest statesman. This he illustrated in this House, and as Sec- 
retary of the Interior. In association with such a man one can 
welcome such pitiful assaults as those of the Tory member from 
rotten Nevada. 

_ Governor Jacob D. Cox was peas friend and associate of General 
Garfield. They were sympathetic with liberalities of all kinds. I do 
not charge that either of them accepted all the tenets of the Cobden 
Club. 

I do not understand General Garfield’s relations in that way, and 
certainly I had no such idea, I do not know how I became a mem- 


Eek ta I ee es 


310 SAMUEL 8. Cox. 


f 
ber. It was tendered to me, I suppose,  fok my persistency in vindi- — 


cating the liberalities of thought which belong to economic study and 


<i 


the observations which I have made of the working of our tariff — 


system. The Cobden Club kas other objects besides freedom of 
trade. It sends out pamphlets in relation to the tenure of land. It 
favors the removal of primogeniture. It would improve the tenure 


of title to land in England as well as elsewhere. It would stop the — 
great pengion-lists and other excesses of English economic adminis- 


tration. Publications on these themes are sent to its members. I 
have received my share and such instructions from them as I could 
glean. But it does not follow that Iam bound by all its tenets, for 


I, too, swear in the words of no master on this Buy ie and no plat- . 


form, and no party. 

While i in a foreign country I was elected a member of a society 
which, being translated, means Phil-Hellenic. Its object is the 
study and diffusion of knowledge as to ancient Greek archeology, 


history, language, and literature. It may have its peculiar theories 


about Grecian art and philosophy; but did it follow that though I 
accepted such an election, honorably tendered, I was bound to any 


particular philosophy of ancient Greece, whether that of Plato or _ 
Aristotle? Must I become a cynic or a stoic, revel in the sty of 
Epicurus, or my soul become transmigratory with Pythagoras? — 


Must I accept a peculiar theory of the dative case, or adhere to the 
pre-Periclean or post-Periclean school of art? I was never called on 
to eat fish or drink cold champagne in the seat of ancient Byzantine 


Empire; but if I had I should have drunk to the Iliad and the Odys- — 


sey and to the swelling of the voiceful sea, which is the vehicle and 


symbol of liberty! Ido not know what this honorable society of 


Greeks may do on the Bosphorus, at the seat of their ancient empire 
and glory, but I hope that they will do nothing that will ever be 


brought up in Congress to the disadvantage of my party or patriotic — 


associations. [Applause.] 
This little esprit of the gentleman, according to the brackets in 
the Record, produced ‘ laughter and applause.” 


It is well that the gentleman got in his laughter first. ‘The inci- 


dent reminds me of another Irishman. He was in a meadow with a 


little bovine. The bovine began to paw the earth and tear up the © 


ground with his horns, and the Irishman laughed and laughed at 
the unique performance. [Laughter.] But soon the little butl 
pitched him over a fence. The Irishman got up, and said, ‘ Isn’t it 
lucky I got in my laugh first?” [Laughter. ] 


Before I am through with the history of this club and its oppo-— 
nents and members he will be, perhaps, not a little astonished to 


Pe ee ey ae eee Ree 
eo) é 


know where the laugh comes in; and that he has made himself the 
advocate of the meanest and worst of all the aristocratic and titled 
_ gentry that ever rackrented and stole the land or harassed and op- 
pressed the people of any country. [Cheers.] 


RECIPROCITY WITH CANADA. 


In this connection it is but just that we should recognize the - 


efforts in and out of this country made by the gentleman from Ohio 
_ {Mr. Butterworth] to reciprocate without restrictions with the Domin- 
ion of Canada. Boldly, in spite of the objurgations of his party, he 
cast protection to the winds, moved on Canada, and took a toboggan 
slide into free trade. [Laughter.] I perused his admirable speeches 
with eagerness to find the re-enforcement of our policy. Alas! He 
was one of the lost sheep to which he referred so felicitously. Doubt- 
less he made the Canadian protected wilderness resonant with his 
bleat. 

The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Kelley], in ‘‘ peeping ” 

around for the one he left more than the ninety-nine who had not 
gone astray, must have been astonished to find that by leaving him 
alone he came home with his little protection tail behind him. 
_'' But what will gentlemen do for the lost Norse lamb from Minne- 
sota [Mr. Nelson]? He is still wandering. Noone is looking for him. 
_ He has the range of the Northwestern pastures, and I think we need 
not mourn over him. [Laughter.] He belongs to the hardy race 
~ who are not afraid to syllable the words and ideas of commercial 
liberty. [Applause.] . 


The gentleman from Ohio is not ignorant of the elements of. 


- reciprocity; he knows their value; he has upheld its banner. I am 
_ proud of his efforts. He applauds the zollverein of our own Union. 
He would extend it not merely by interchanges with Canada, but 


_ to the other Americas. But the moment he mounts his reciprocal - 


charger and makes our continent the scene of his chivalric endea- 
vor, he turns his back upon other continents. 

Mr. BurrerwortuH (of Ohio). If my friend had read my speech 

he would have found that my argument went to the effect that 
the protection system deals with conditions and not with boundary 

lines. It deals with the philosophy of economic politics without any 

_ reference whatever to geographical lines. 

Mr. Cox. Then, of course, if that is the definition, my friend is 

in favor of his philosophy being extended. It means to be reciprocal 


with Canada. If it be good philosophy for Canada, it is good phi-~ 


losophy to apply to Central America and South America and Mex- 
10, 


é 


ea, ae ne 


Ree RO Om 311 


Sab coe a 


8312 SAMUEL 8. COX. 


, 
> iM 


Mr. BUTTERWORTH. Undoubtedly; and wherever the conditions — 
are the same. It is against the false conditions that destroy, where — 
restrictions should apply, and not against the locality. The gentle- — 
man will see—— 

Mr. Cox. I get your idea. 

Mr. BUTTERWORTH. It is a good one, is it not? [Laughter.] 

Mr. Cox. Yes; but it is a little remote and nebulous. [Laughter — 
and applause.] But I think I get it. ? 

I have not much charity for my friend from Ohio. I have for my 
friend from Nevada, for he does not know as much as my friend 
from Ohio. [Laughter.] The gentleman from Ohio is not ignorant 
of the conditions in regard to reciprocity. The same conditions 
would bring European countries here by the aid of the vapor of 
wator and by the telegraph. 

Mr. BUTTERWORTH. Now permit me a moment. 

Of course in this matter, and a part of my proposition was that, 

-should the tariff fence be extended around Canada and extend the 
system along and around the border, they adopting the same tariff 
system as against the world, where different conditions prevail, 
should we not extend a hand to them? 

Mr. Cox. I give you my hand on that. [The gentlemen shook 


_ hands. ] 


Mr. BUTTERWORTH. Then we are making progress at last. 

Mr. Cox. [am with the gentleman, and by the doctrine of Rich- 
ard Cobden and his club, and the same doctrine of John Stuart Mill, 
and the same doctrine of Robert J. Walker and his tariff, I would 
advocate for Canada the liberality of our exchanges. I congratulate 
and welcome the honorable gentleman within the bosom of the good 
old free-trade and revenue-reform party. [Applause.] And I will 
give out for him, before I get through, a hymn to sing that will 
warm his heart so as to make ourselves thoroughly harmonious. 

The gentloman from Ohio, who is a most erudite and eloqueni 
gentleman, joined with the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Symes], 
who is also both eloquent and learned—and, by the way, Colorado is 
a sort of English colony—in deprecating the Anglomania which leads 
members here to oppose the Tory protection party of England and 
Canada. I hope to see my friends’ efforts bring fruit in reciprocity 
with Canada; and such fruit that will create wealth, content, and 
cordiality for both countries, as Cobden and Chevalier did for Eng- 
land and France, and as Cobden and Robert J. Walker did for Eng- 
land and America when they shook hands across the Atlantic, the 
one by the tariff of 1846, and the other by the repeal of the corn 


4 an. eae ee Fe tae Tt! ee Se Seer aoe th - tow a! tid me TN Be To. te 
Ta AAR seas aie aa ae, Ee ben raad aol j 
3 hei? g . e ‘ 

Se " : 

o> 7 . 


SAMUEL 8. COX. — 313 


laws. They thus gave a‘splendid agerandizement of their respective 
countries. They enhanced the glory of the Anglo-Saxon race, 


OHIO AND THE SOUTH. 


The picture the gentleman from Ohio drew from my native State 

is a proud record of the achievements of her people. During this — 
centennial season it was peculiarly appropriate; but when it is con- 
_ sidered that her prosperity is due in part to unequal laws, there is 
not so much pride in the comparison he institutes between Ohio and 
the South. Why,.let me ask, if these laws be equal—as tax laws 
should be in a common union—should these results be so diverse? 
Why boast of results which are the results of Federal disfavor to 
one section and favor to another? Is it fair that strength should 
forever aid the strong? Shall wrong hold sway forever? No, no; 
the gentleman following the vaticinations of the gentleman from 
Michigan [Mr. Burrows] sees the iron which is sleeping in the sunless 
- chambers of the southern earth awake, and through its agencies 
_ bless the South beyond their fondest dreams. 
_. The attempt of the gentleman from Ohio to excite indignation 
-,against Democrats who were in sympathy with the corn laws, of 
_ which Cobden was the leading champion, shows that he is not yet 
_ altogether in sympathy with the men who favored that repeal. 


TORIES AND PROTECTIONISTS RUINED IRELAND. 


That class of men for five centuries held England in its thrall, 
and, what was worse, mercilecsly persecuted Ireland. They were 
 protectionists of the most intense and grasping sort. It was while 
_ these Tories ruled that they destroyed the labor of Ireland by ex- 
~ actions and persecutions only equaled by the myrmidons of Crom- 
well. They confiscated like Cromwell, but they did worse. Their 
‘protection, like that of the wolf to the lamb, struck down the linen 
and other industries of Ireland. . 
The gentleman therefore places himself in line with the spoilers 
of Ireland in the past centuries and with the Salisburys and the 
- Balfours of the present. He is in sympathy with the long list of 
Tory ministers, from Lord North down, who have harassed and 
plundered that ‘‘ saddest isle of the sea.” [Applause. ] 
He places himself in so far as he can in sympathy with a party 
o: aristocrats who, under the reign of the Georges, and the worst of 
the Georges—George the Third—produced the revolution which gave 
us independence, and who, with allies like our Indians—those hell- 
hounds of savage war—and the mercenary Hessians, made the early 


Regen i 
RMS SS Te yet Pr wa 


\ 


314  BAMUEL 8. Cox 


eee « Pale ok eae tt, bo ek ig eS 
rea ee peas aes Sasi e: ae Be ies Ri pe | x 


struggles of our fathers a long conflict against all the barbaric © 
cruelty of the Tory protectionists and landlords. He arrays himself 
against that Liberal party from whom the Whigs of our Revolution 
received their name. It was led by Chatham, Barré, and Burke in © 
the defense of our colonies against Tory taxation and tyranny. The 
old Federal party was recruited, after our Revolution, from the 
Tories. During the war of 1812 that same Federal element sustained ~ 
England against the Democracy. To-day the present Tory admin- 
istration is fighting the Liberals of England and Ireland with Glad- 


_stone and Parnell at their head. They are protectionists. They 


drove the English people in 1846 as they are driving the Irish by — 
every menace to their freedom and their prosperity—to the very 
point of starvation and insurrection. [Applause. ] ; 


LESSONS OF THE CORN-LAW REPEAL. 


There are lessons here quite pertinent to the pending bill and de- 
bate. I crave your indulgence for dwelling on them. 

For five centuries England blundered in fostering industry by 
restricting exports and forbidding imports. Her statesmen, like the 
Lotus Eaters of Tennyson, listened to the— 

Chant of an ill-used race that cleave the soil, 
Storing their yearly little dues of wheat and wine and oil. 


Her arousal came with a terrific revolution, producing clamors for 


bread and protests against starvation. 

Up until 1846, when she began to reciprocate with us, the history 
of her corn laws is the history of a desperate struggle unexampled ~ 
in our world. 

Her first effort was to restrict the imports of foreign wheat, — 
rye, barley, oats, and maize—different species of so-called ‘‘corn” 
—so that she might have abundance and cheapness at home. 

These early restrictions, from 1360 to 1688, were well intended, 
She was, during that period, an agricultural rather than a manufac- 
turing country. She raised all the corn she consumed, and had a 
surplus. At that time any law against the importation of corn 
would have been inoperative. She was not then so foolish as to 
enact such laws. 

We have upon our statutes some similar sops, quite as unsub- 
stantial as they are insulting to our farmers. 

But even with cuch legislation, she was hampering the natural 
force of her industry and trade. She was forming the habit of 
meddling and tinkering, by Parliamentary action, with the growth 
of her industrics, She was raising up a favored class, Of course it — 


4 


first lesson growing out of the corn laws. Strike out the words 


ee ~ A thle TU GS ty aria 
a 


was done on the pretext of protection and patriotism, but it was done 
really for the aggrandizement of the rich landed proprietors. She 
built up great families and self-seeking monopolists; and this is our 


‘“‘agricultural monopolists,” and insert ‘‘manufacturing monopo- 
lists,” and leave the word ‘‘ protection” stand, and you have the 
same combination here which throttled both commerce and agri- 
culture there. It compelled the people to pay tribute to the lords 


of the land. [Applause.] In other words, it put money into the 


pockets of the few by crippling and destroying the industries of the 
many. 

Then came another era of class government. It was that of an 
internal protective system. It was a system of bounties and penal- 
ties—bounties to the rich and penalties upon the poor, forbidding 
the purchase of corn in one market in order to dispose of it in 
another. It crowded out the middlemen. The only result was 

one which ever follows the intermeddling of law with the natural 
course of trade—stagnation and decay. 

More than one hundred years ago, contemporaneous with our own 
struggle for independence, these internal restrictions were effaced 


‘from English law. The protective system failed and free trade was 


established, but only within the cir cuit of thec ountry’s borders. In 
our Union we copied something from this example. Bounties were 


- gimply the price which the people paid for the lush growth of unre- 


munerative labor. What the operatives of England paid for so 
many years to agriculture and its ‘‘splendid paupers,” agriculture in 
this country has paid to the lords of the loom and the forge, who 
have been inspired with the same grasping avarice in their de- 


- mand for enormous duties on manufactured articles. 


It is not necessary, in drawing these lessons from English legisla- 


_ tion, that I should discuss the justice of giving a bounty to one per- 


gon or one class for encouragement and not toanother. Absolute jus- 
tice requires a bounty or asubsidy to every one, and when that para- 


~ disical epoch arrives there is a bounty to noone! If my neighbor 


pay a bounty to me equal to that which I pay to him, there is no 
benefit to any one, except to the tax-gatherer. 
PROHIBITION OF CORN IN ENGLAND, 


A hundred years ago the manufacturing and commercial interests 
of England began to arise with greater strength. New avenues of 


_ wealth opened from the colonies. The nation received an impulse of 


prosperity. The consumption of corn increased and prices rose cor- 


respondingly, Then began the prohibition of grain importation, . 


“BAMUEL 8. COX. 4 OTR 


4 


Sy 
Re ees 


475F 
ae 


: 316 ratioan ‘SAMUBL ‘i COL 


The agricultural monopolists fancied that they were floating serenely 
upon the bosom of a Pactelus whose very sands were gold. They 
were deceived just as the protectionists in this age and country de- 
ceive themselves. Corn laws began to appear in all the variety of 
their manipulations to outwit the natural laws of trade. Food be- 
came dear, but dear food did not bring high wages. Riots became 
common. Labor was ground down between the upper and nether 
mill-stone of protection. Then began a most terrific era in England. 
It had all the agonies of a tragedy. Gaunt famine, like a skeleton, 
tnvaded laborers and tenants, even upon the very farms whence 
came the rich livings of the titled landlords. Wages declined, rents 
advanced, and wealth became more and more inequitably distributed. 
The rich grew richer and the poor poorer. Then came on the strug- 
gle which gave presage of relief. The landed interests were stil 
dominant. The hungry population resented their exactions with a 


fury bornof despair and death. Parliamentwas menaced. Cordons 


of the military surrounded St. Stephen’s. 


CORN-LAW REPEALERS. 


During this night of British gloom the protectionists of England 
were callous to every appeal and every interest of human life. 
Starvation has a wild logic of its own. Brave men arose. They 
questioned with stern and pitiless inquisition the legislation which 
taxed bread. The scales fell from their long-abused sight. Little 
legislative makeshifts were used to palliate the consummate evil and 
postpone the dreaded crisis. In vain the great families, led by the 
Duke of Wellington, who threw his sword into the scale, attempted 
to withstand the current. 


LEADERS OF THE PEOPLE AGAINST TORIES, ARISTOCRATS, AND PRO- 
TECTIONISTS. 


Who led this warfare for the poor against the rich ? Who gave 
it oratory, and dialects, and song? Who voiced the disasters and 
cried aloud for the reform, for the repeal of these cruel laws? 
Chief among those who vindicated the rights of the poor against 
monopoly in this legislative war, in which he never rested for years 
was Mr. Villiers, of Wolverhampton. He is an old, old man now. 
They have erected a monument to his memory, even in his life. I 
place his name before that of others, not less brave but more laggard, 
under whose leadership the repeal was consummated. | 

When that distinguished statesman, Sir Robert Peel, was de- 
nounced by his party in the Commons for the act of repeal he cried 
out defiantly: : 


~y 


SAMUEL 8. COX. j 317 


I shall leave a name execrated by every monopolist who, from less honor- - 
able motives, clamors for protection because it conduces to his own individual 
benefit; but it may be that I shall leave a name sometimes remembered with 

— expressions of good-will in the abodes of those whose lot it is to labor, and to 

_ earn their daily bread by the sweat of their brow, when they shall recruit 
their exhausted strength with abundant and untaxed food, the sweeter Deans 
-it.is no longer leavened by the sense of injustice. 


-. There were other men who championed the qemend of the people a. 

for the ‘‘ cheap loaf,” and whose names are handed down honorably Be, 
among the poor of England, whose ‘‘untaxed food was all the a 
_ sweeter because it was no longer leavened by the sense of injustice.” 


OTHER CHAMPIONS IN AMERICA AND ENGLAND. 


In the long roll of these worthies, champions too of anti-slavery 
in America as well as England, are Cobbett, Prentice, W. J. Fox, 
Hume, Potter, Dr. Bowring, Garrison, Phillips, and others. But 

_.why make the catalogue? That night of English wrong was set 
thick with stars—a whole constellation. Cobden among them was = 
‘shining resplendently as a star of the first magnitude. ([Cheers.] a 

~ Cobden was not a nobleman. He was not an hereditary legislator. s 
He was born of the people. He was the son of a yeoman. He was : 
brought up to trade. It was his business training, together with 
observation abroad, while a partner in a Manchester cotton-mill, that eo 

- made him so cogent in debate and so simple and earnest in his de- ; 

 votion to the cause of the people and to the *‘ cheap loaf.” [Applause.] 


me 


EULOGY OF COBDEN, FRIEND OF AMERICA, 
I should be derelict as a member of the Congress, or as a citizen 
- of the United States, if I did not, even in this feeble way, vindicate 
the splendid fame of Richard Cobden. He was not merely a friend 
of the poor when they needed friends, but he was a distinguished 
- economist when economy was thundered from the hustings for the 
relief of the starving. More than all these, by his speeches, writings, 
diplomacy, and parliamentary efforts, he has done more than any 
other Englishman to hold up the institutions of our own country, 
not merely for the indulgence of mankind, but for their imitation 
and admiration. Nor were the encomiums which he bestowed upon 
our country born of a mercenary or trading spirit. He had a genuine 
love for America. He twice visited us. He denounced those who ne 
se had depreciated our character and slandered our people. Ro 
. In a volume of his writings, which I have in my hand, thereisa 
- comparison between Great Britain and America. With what fervor s 


Sig re SAMUEL & COX 


he turns to the industrial, economical, and fore peaceful policies 4 
of America, while with the live coal of a seer he bids at distance our _ 


future, Hail! He does this with a pride which knows no selfishness _ 


and with a humanity that regards no isolation. England and 
America were, in his view, bound together in peaceful fetters with 
the strongest of all ligatures that can bind two nations—commercial 
interests and the destiny of representative governments. [Applause. | 
He took, pride in our discharge of our public debt. Though he 
found in America a rival with his own country and analyzed the 
disadvantages of the position of England in comparison with 
America, he saw in the unlimited extent of our unsettled territory 


a means of employing capital and labor with which the little isles of sda 


Great Britain would in vain strive to compete. - 

He was not insensible to the fact that the Englishman was a born 
aristocrat, with an insatiable love of caste, which he said pervaded 
every degree from the highest to the lowest; but he believed that in 
the course of time such changes would come through education and 
suffrage as to bring England upon the roster of genuine republican 
states. Every reform which England has made in the interests of 
her people, for her colonial advancement, found Richard Cobden its 
friend and his gifted speech its ally. And it comes with an ill grace 
from an American, whether native or adopted, to blur the es- — 
cutcheon of this champion of America and this honest friend of the 
people. 

I had the honor of being on the committee which welcomed him 
to America. He visited this Hall. He was received with as much 
if not more welcome from the Republican than from the Democratic 
side of the Chamber. No one made his name a reproach, for he 
had been the friend of our Union. He had been the companion of 
John Bright, the Quaker manufacturer of Birmingham, in denounc- 
ing with resonant eloquence and virile logic the infamies of pro- 
tection. 

I must beg my Irish friends to remember that Daniel O’Connell 
spoke for the repeal as the friend of the English and Irish people. 
Speaking at Manchester, he demanded to know ‘‘ why, if the corn 
laws are good to rescue a people from wretchedness, they do not 
rescue the people of Ireland? If these protective laws give employ- 
ment and high wages,” said he, ‘‘ why do they not give them in agri- 
cultural Ireland ?’ Subsequently, in demanding to know what the 
corn laws were for, he answered his own question by saying, ‘‘to 
put money into the pockets of the landlords—not the money of the 
Russians, the Danes, or the Swedes, but pal of ee tollo yee pA 
men, 7? Fi 


to" 
7 9am 
ye eS 
t ." eh 


; Fae nN ‘ ; of i es 

SAMUEL 8. COX, - 319 > 

a 

: POETRY OF THE REPEALERS. ee 


Seconding these efforts of the tribunes of the people came the : 
blacksmith poet, Ebenezer Elliott, and the ‘‘Voices from the | 5 


Crowd,” by Charles Mackay. These corn-law rhymes not only © 

- denounced the exactions by which bread was made dear to the peo- 
ple, but they looked forward to that influx of grain from the new sy 
hemisphere—America—by which the loaf would be cheapened and a 
the people saved from starvation. 7 
These men sung as if they disdained any compromise. They a 
~ moved on to victory ; they found the realm of England in discrowned y i 
and hunger-ridden anarchy. The time was ‘‘ripe, and rotten-ripe,” a 
for change. a 


They gave it comparative quiet and prosperity, and progress fol- j 
lowed the victory. More than that, so far as America was con- ae 
cerned it gave us lessons by which we were mutually bound and by : 

-. which our values were immensely enhanced. The Democracy of the — ‘ 
United States reciprocated. Robert J. Walker shook hands with 
Cobden across the deep. In the interest of the people of both nations ie, 
wa great benefaction fell like manna in a wilderness of selfishness. a 
[Applause.] The event justifies the truth that nature, in her over- 
flowing goodness, had provision against scarcity and famine; so that : 
when crops fail in a small area like Great Britain, or are insufficient : 
to supply her needs, there is lavish abundance and a surplus in other ye 
_ lands, in the valley of the Mississippi and its tributary streams. The 3 
_ Jaw to which Virgil referred two thousand years ago as the “‘ eternal 
_ federation” by which Rome grew great, is the same law in modern. 
days. Progress has given to the phrase a miraculous meaning, for 
it multiplied the loaf for the multitude. The result here was not aa 
merely a home market for home product, but the widest extent of n 
surface for production in our own land, causing less danger of 
scarcity and an abundance of the necessaries gue conveniences of 
life for exportation abroad. 

_ The repeal of the corn laws and the tariff of 1846 was the conse- 
crated protest of benevolent legislation. They vindicated the provi- 
dence of the All-loving Father, whereby the excess of one land and 
its opulent harvests, and the diversified labor of the people of all 

-. countries compensate for the deficiencies of another. ; 
The same arguments which are used to-day by the protectionists 
here were used by the protectionists in England to prevent the 
~ repeal of the corn laws. The old story of the home market, and 
especially in the contingency of foreign war and the dependence 
pect pach country for supplies was used in the Parliament of 


it the duty of legislators to exclude monopoly from the saab of se 


- increased much faster, and all of our people had full employment. | 
_ During that — from 1850 to 1860-61, a tramp was as unknown st e 


320 : SAMUEL 8. COX. 


England just as now in the Congress of the United States. They — 
were used in vain. England could no more be independent of — 
foreign supply for her bread than America could be independent. of 
England in the sale of her grain and cotton. — 

The fruitfulness of labor was increased, toil itself was mie oa 
misfortunes were avoided, and the benefits of the repeal, through 
international dependence and reciprocity, gave a new impulse to 
both countries. It opened a market for English goods here, while it 
enlarged our market for our product abroad. It did not injure 
either country. It aided both beyond all the dreams of avarice. . | 

During the twenty years preceding 1849 the exports of British 
and Irish productions had increased 33} per cent. for each decade. 
From 1849 to 1859 the increase was 105 per cent. It is fair to pre- 
sume that by 1859 English industry had become adjusted to the new 


-conditions. Nevertheless, for the period up to the Franco-Prussian 


war there was an increase of exports of 45 per cent. The value of 
the exports per capita in 1849 was $10.93; in 1859 it had more than 
doubled, being $22.11. In 1869 it had risen to $29.79. In 1878, while 
we Americans were making great boasts of our exports, their value 
per capita was only $12. Nor have the working people of England 
been routed out of the mills by foreign pauper labor. In cotton 


manufacture the number of hands employed increased from 330,924 . 
- in 1850 to 479,512 in 1874, The woolen trade for the same ele ng 


nearly doubled its force. So also the flax industry. . 
Among manufactures of more recent growth jute reported 5,967 

operatives in 1861, and 37,920 in 1874. And the tale might be con- 

tinued indefinitely. . 


INTERDEPENDENCY OF NATIONS, 


God never made an independent man nor allowed an independent 
nation. Men and nations must lean upon each other. The very ~ 
variety of the growth of nations with the staple of every soil make 


nations as selfishness from the family of individuals. 


BENEFICENCE OF THE TARIFF OF 1846. 


There never was a tariff during whose continuance there was so 
much advancement in all that makes up the wealth of nations as 
our low tariff of 1846. Under its provisions farmers got better prices © 
for wheat, grain, wool, etc., than they have averaged under the 
present tariff. Manufactures multiplied more rapidly, farm values i 


eee maT at Whee i PL Re er oe eT tee , RUN, UE VEX ch noe ye 
Meng L ah Sak tie Pe a oe ee Nidede Ree rig nf teks , > z hen 


SAMUEL 8. COX. 


as a “‘ trust,” a strike had no place in our political lexicon, the word 
“lockout” was infrequent, and the word ‘‘boycott” was not 


known. There were no conflicts between capital and labor. The 
country became harmonious so far as its policy was concerned, 


because it was just. 


A SCOTCHMAN’S HOROSCOPE. 


In glancing at the cold statement in McCulloch’s Commercial 
Dictionary, under the head of ‘‘ New York,” I find from that frigid 
Scotchman and statist this summing up of the effect of the great 
commercial reform during the administration of Sir Robert Peel: 


He says that the last and greatest of all changes was the change in the corn 
laws. It hada powerful influence in the United States. Mr. Polk’s Govern- 
ment having free trade by these and other circumstances succeeded in carrying 
a comparatively liberal tariff, to take effect from first of December, 1846; and 


_ this tariff kept its ground until 1857, when it was superseded by a still more 
liberal one. But the downfall of the tariff by which it was carried was quickly 


followed by a reimposition of high duties by the act of Pongrens of March 2, 


1861, and this again by the outbreak of the civil war. 


But— 
adds the great Scotchman— 


the bulk of the American people have never been supposed to be blind or : 


indifferent to their own necessities; and these they may be assured will be best 
promoted by reverting to, as soon as possible, and maintaining a system which 


_ enables them to sell in the dearest and to buy in the cheapest markets. If they 


retain high duties, they will fall wholly on themselves and on no one else, and 


the less they buy from foreigners the less they will be able to export to them. 


In other words, as I have often preached in this House, we cannot 
continue to sell our surplus, which is growing every day by reason 
of our increasing army of labor, unless we buy from others. A one- 


sided arrangement leads to impoverishment, overproduction for 


home needs, and consequent mortgages and bankrnptcy. 
_ Mark the words which I cite from this cold statistician. He 
warns us that to retain high duties they will fall wholly upon our- 
selves, and on no one else. 

Or, since gentlemen prefer figures of poetry to figures of arith- 


metic, I might well apply the metaphor of Byron about the struck 
eagle stretched upon the plain, who viewed his own feather on the 


fatal dart, and winged against the shaft that quivered in his heart. 
[Applause. ] 


Indeed, sir, we are already feeling the pangs of the wound that 
we ourselves have made; but it is all the keener to feel them when 


Per eta a. sepeees iS 


oe 


Prax tan 
re aS 


e a yemaay te 
Or aR SE ee te te ea By 
ig eos Meta get ate Oe giana Cae ESTAS Diy ake Re EM 
aN RRR EON Peg ey Ca ae 


Root oe RI Ler 


Sey et ee 
pone cere 


> 


/ _ 
ror 
Rea 


sino ea ea 

pageale a ate Sy 
mts eet i ae et 
2 eke ST, * eet 


322 | SAMUEL 8. COX. I 


we reflect that we have furnished the pinion which impelled the 
steel, and that the very plumage which had warmed our eagle’s nest 
drank the last life-drop of his bleeding breast. 


RECIPROCAL PROSPERITY. 


England grew rich and America prospered by reciprocity. And 
when this reciprocity was broken on our part by inordinate tariffs, 
we failed proportionately, and the history of our tariff, shown in 
this debate, illustrates the fact that our tariffs, when they are low, 
give advantages and BE VBRCEAT AY When anny are high it is 
otherwise. 

Patriotism and economy are not convertible terms. Economy 
means the law of the house, the law of supply and demand. It 
means cash and credit, not a banner nor a border. 

Every people must trade abroad. Livery individual is dependent 


upon some other. If he be a luxurious man, he must have jewels. 


from Golconda polished in Amsterdam, His Cclicate neckerchief 
must tie him to the loom of Jacquard. The spices to stimulate his 


appetite come from the ancient seats of Oriental power. His cigar 


is from Cuba and Manila; his coffee from Arabia, Java, and Brazil. 


- China gives him tea, and Cuba sugar. He will have his clothes, in 


spite of laws, owt of the broadcloth of France 2nd England, and his 
wife her dresses, of silk and satin, from Lyons, provided always 
they are offered on better terms, while for the man who is not a bon 
vivant or a rich man, the sail and steam of traffic is in perpetual 
unrest to relieve his burdens, cheapen his comforts, and provide his 
necessaries. — 

Therefore liberal policies as to trade, while in our country always 
contemplating a revenue for an economic administration of the 
Government, should enlarge the area of trade and stimulate labor 
unto richer harvests. ; 

No man with a particle of reasoning in his composition can say 
that abundance is a curse or scarcity a blessing. 

The elements of England which overcame the willful obstinacy of 
Anglo-Saxon legislators brought mankind together and gave to the 
producer of corn in America his splendid market and its quick 


returns by steam and telegraph, and to the daily toilers of England 


it answered our Lord’s prayer for their ‘‘ daily bread.” 
Great Britain was forced to abandon her extreme protective 
policy only when the country was brought to the verge of bank- 


-ruptcy, starvation, and revolution. Her protectionists, as early as 


1842, made the same arguments as those made in this House by the 


protectionists, They predicted that the reduction of the British — 


ont SRO ere eles splat 6 iat aie: PEP NEM 


oe Ke 


“SAMUnL h COx ee Pea 


tariff would shake the social relations of the country to their very © 
foundations, subvert the whole system of society, lower wages, 
throw great quantities of land out of cultivation, render it impossible 


. for the government to raise taxes, and reduce the laborer to a lower 


scale in life. Nothing of the kind happened. 


THE ENGLISH FLAG ON THE SEA. 


_ Among other predictions were those of Disraeli and other Tories 
that the ship-building of Great Britain would vanish, but never in all 
history has there been seen such a stupendous result as that which 
followed the repeal of restrictions on her ships. Her shipping rose 
from 3,400,000 tons in 1848 to over 8,000,000 tons in 1883, and it is 
still rising, while we have lost all of our foreign shipping. 


OUR OCEAN TONNAGE LOST. 


It is the saddest of our experiences as a nation that our flag” 
under navigation laws that will not let us buy, and our tariff laws 
that will not let us build, has ceased to kiss the breezes of other than 


_ our inland and coasting States. 


Dies ire, dies illa, 
Solvet szeclum in favilla. 

The degradation of our commerce was like the obscuration of a 
star in the sky. It is nota partial but a total eclipse, a lost Pleiad 
without even the phantasy of a nebulous cloud to reassure us of the 
return of our days of commercial pride on the sea. 


-A PICTURE OF PROSPERITY. 


Whereas, in 1841, when Sir Robert Peel took office, there was no — 
interest, manufacturing or otherwise, which was not depressed, no 


- property which was not depreciated, no seaport in which ships were 


not rotting at,the wharf, no agricultural labor that was not working 


on starvation wages and parochial relief, and when the revenue was 


insufficient to meet the national expenses and bankruptcy menaced 
the country, all at once, as by some enchanter’s wand, agriculture 
became prosperous, rents were increased, manufactures and employ- 
ment were extended, wages were raised, the revenue was enhanced, 
property wasimproved, and taxation was lessened. Every successive 
movement in the amelioration of the tariff of Great Britain up to the 
repealing act of 1846 showed advancement in all the elements which 
make up the happiness and wealth of nations. [Applause.] 


THE FARMING INTERESTS. 


It is easily shown that not more than 5 per cent. of the labor of 
the country is affected by our. present tariff in the way of protection. 


“ee ee ee 
1S tae Prone Oe eS er ne ts dl dine 


MS Pie teres ipa WEg ae wee 
4 ‘ 4 


i oe 
j 


SAMUEL 8. OOX. 


Other members have shown the relation which the agriculturist bears 
to the tariff, and they have shown he is not protected at all. But,on 
the other hand, he is at the mercy of other countries, with their 
cheap forms of labor. He must sell his crops at prices fixed by the 
pauper labor, not only of Europe, but of Asia and Africa, since the 
price of wheat in this country is regulated by the price of the Euro- 
pean markets. The whole world contributes its supplies to those 
markets, and the peasants of Russia, Hungary, and India, with 
their cheaper labor, are rivals of our farmers. Therefore, our farm- 
ers are in direct competition with the cheapest labor in the world. - 
The Indian fellah, with his 6 pence a day for his labor, and the 
Russian serf, with something less, compete with our own farmer, ~ 
whose product is subject in addition to a charge for transportation 


~ through inland to seaboard and three thousand miles of water beside 


to the markets which fix the prices of his stuffs. When you con- 
sider that, in addition to all this, he has to pay the increased price 
for every protected article which he buys, you can well understand 
what the protective system does for him. It throttles him. It par- 
alyzes the four million of farmers who should be the mainstay of the 
country. It is no exaggeration, perhaps, when one of our humorists — 


in Georgia wags his funny tongue about the infant industry which | 


gets its slice of bounty, and which “‘ takes it a powerful long time to 
get grown.” 


When a man— 
says he— 


: goes to one of these manufacturing cities he finds everybody strutting around, — | 
_ and the banks full of money, and the land worth $200 a front foot; but just 


let Congress talk about reducing the tariff, and they scrouge up and pull a 


small bottle from under their coat-tails and cry out, ‘‘I am an infant—a poor 


little infant! Ain’t you gwine to protect me? Are you gwine to take away 
my pap and leave me an orfen ?” 


Another one of our humorists in writing of and from the great 
West intimates that the farmer has got the priceless boon of liberty. — 
But it is liberty to pay war prices for everything he wants, and to 
sell his crops for less and less year after year; liberty to pay big 
prices for machinery, help, clothing, and everything else he buys, 
and then to ride into town on a December day, accompanied by the — 
cold remains of an assassinated hog, and then to be told that 
pork had gone down to 4 cents! He regarded such a ride, in the 
society of a hog that died by one’s own hand, as depressing, and 


every time you look around, to see that same frozen smile witha 
chip in it, while his chest is thrown vpen in an ingenious way by —_ 


play ee eae an as Ae lag ee i is ne lt ee a GC Nee 


SAMUEL 8 COX. | 325. 


means of a hickory stick, in order to ao that his leaf-lard is ail 
that has been represented. And yet it was that same animal that 

had been loved so well in infancy, hid down in the cellar so you 

could not hear him squeal when he was killed, and which the pro- ~ 

tected farmer afterwards helped to scrape with a case-knife, so that 
even in death he would be asource of pride. He is depressed by the 
thought that all of that hog is swallowed up by the price of the pro- 
tected frock he hoped to carry home to his wife. 

Iam not particularly alarmed at the India competition in wheat 
with which we are threatened. Our Department of Agriculture in > 
its Report No. 46, November, 1887, has a paper which is calculated 
to allay any alarm on this subject, even in spite of the increased im- 

portation. Nor do I care to detail at the present time the varying 
prices of our wheat and other grain stuffs, or the ample surplus 
under every circumstance and condition for exportation. Our prices 
have been remunerative and the quantities enormous. If necessary, 
I will append to my remarks some tabular statements showing the 
distribution in latter years of the immense productions of our soil, 
and some extracts showing the overrated competition which we have ae 
feared from India and other countries. si 
—''- A table which I have before me will show that from 1872 to 1886 eg 
the United States has furnished in grain and flour 51.10 per cent. 4 
_ more than one half of the whole of the wheat surplus of the world, 
which is absorbed by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ire- 
land. 


The iercot national product since 1874 is annually harvestedin = 

- ourcountry. France stands in the second rank, and imports more | « 
_ than she exports. India comes third, and Russia occupies the fourth a 
rank. The table will show the various relative proportions. f 
My chief object in referring to these matters now is to show the @ 
impulse which was given to the accrued product of our soil by the “ 
repeal of the corn laws and the enactment of the tariff of 1846. a 
EXPORTS OF CORN AND COTTON BEFORE AND AFTER RECIPROCITY. q 

ee 


In a table which I have prepared I have taken the exports of 
wheat and corn alone, which includes flour and meal. I have tabu- . 
lated them in five-year periods. 

In 1830, at the end of the five years, we exported over 23,000,000 | 
bushels of wheat and more than 6,500,000 bushels of corn. 

These exports grew in half-decennial periods, until in 1845, pre- _ 
ceding the great reciprocity treaty between Great Britain and the © 
United States, when the wheat export was over 34,000,000 and the 

: ae about 8,000,000. <, 


326 ik ay Wee ol ee 28 UEL 8. OOX. 


Now mark the marvelous increase which, in spite of the Tories of _ 
England and their allies here, resulted from the liberalities of Cobden 
and his allies of the Corn Law League. 

The five years ending in 1850 show our wheat export to be over 
71,500,000 bushels, and our corn nearly 54,000,000. So that almost at 
once, compared with the five years ending in 1845, we more than 
doubled our wheat exportation and had more than six times as 
much of corn exportation. Since 1850 the figures are still more 
marvelous. So that at the end of the five years ending in 1885 our 
exported wheat amounted to 608,000,000 bushels and our corn to 
nearly 279,000,000 of bushels. And since that time this stupendous — 
energy of our soil and enterprise of our farmers can be traced direct- | 
ly to the liberalities of interchange championed by the Cobdens of 
England. Is it for this great benefaction to the teeming West, with 
its fat glebe and stalwart farmers, that these men of 1846 are re- 
proached by their Tory allies in America? 

It is also as true with respect to the production and export of 
cotton as with respect to the exportation of grain. A grand impulse 
was given to that staple by the reciprocal laws of 1846. 

_ Going back to 1830, when our annual production was only 1,000,000 
bales and our exportation 772,000, we find that after 1848-’49 we have 


2,808,000 production and 2,226,000 exportation, while during the — 


last year our production was 6,500,000 bales and our exportation 
4,500,000. 

Here is to be found the wealth of our magnificent soil, whose 
surplus has enabled us not only.to pay off our great indebtedness, 
but under hampered conditions and in spite of the restrictions of our 
tariffs, most unnaturally exacting and cruel, to assume among the 
powers of the earth the station which we to-day occupy. 

It would seem that there is no argument that can be made from 
our authentic statistics cogent enough to persuade the selfishness of 
men even into the indulgence of self-love. Self-love has been defined 
_as that which would lead a man to eat his own dinner and allow his 


neighbor to eat his, while selfishness is defined to be the appetite of : 


a man for his own dinner and a desire to eat that of his neighbor. 

It would be a very difficult task to persuade men who are selfish 
to indulge in self-love, much less in disinterestedness. Perhaps the 
most cogent reasoning on this subject would be after the manner of 
our humorists, known as the ad absurdum, which Aristotle ranks 
among the best rudiments of logic. 

We have a humorist known as ‘‘ Bill Nye.” I was‘about to read 
for your relief his description, exaggerated somewhat, bo the farm- 
er’s life out West. I forbear. 


- eet Pea BAMORL 8. OOK LO ORE ae 


A Mremper. Give it to us. 

Mr. Cox. I will print it, as good reading on a dry topic. This: 7 
clever writer has been acting as a rural gentleman. He has ideas of . 
stock-growing, garden-sauce, and other home-spun matters about “ 

farming in the West. I quote: 


ea. 


‘Well, farmin’ is like runnin’ a paper in regards to some things. Every ; : 
feller in the world will take and turn in and tell you how to do it, even if he — oe 
don’t know a blame thing about it. There ain’t a man in the United States ‘ 


to-day that don’t secretly think he could run airy one if his other business 
busted on him, whether he knows the difference between a new milch cow 
- and a horse hay-rake or not. We had one of these embroidered night-shirt 
farmers come fromiown better’n three years ago. Been a toilet-soap man and 
done well, and so he came out and bought a farm that had nothing to it but a 
fancy house and barn, a lot of medder in the front yard, and a southern 
aspect. The farm was no good. You couldn’t raise a disturbance on it. 
Well, what does he do? Goes and gits a passle of slim-tailed yeller cows from 
New Jersey, and aims to handle cream and diversified farming. Last year the 
cuss sent a load of cream over and tried to sell it at the new crematory while 
-. the funeral and hollercost was goin’ on. I may be a sort of a chump myself, 
but I read my paper and don’t get left like that. 
‘¢ What are the prospects for farmers in your State ?” 2 
- ,, . * Well, they are pore. Never was so pore, in fact, sence I’ve been there. 
Folks wonder why boys leaves the farm. My boys left so as to get protected, 
they said, and so they went into a clothing store, one of ’em, and one went 
into hardware, and one is talkin’ protection in the Legislature this winter. 
They said that farmin’ was gittin’ to be like fishin’ and huntin’, well enough 
for a man that has means and leisure, but they couldn’t make a livin’ at it, they 
said. Another boy is ina drug store, and the man that hires him says he is a 
 poyal feller.” ge 
| «« Kind of a castor royal feller,” I said, with a shriek of laughter. oe 
He waited until I had laughed all I wanted to, and then he said: a 
‘«T’ve always hollered for high tariff in order to hyst the public debt, but f 
now that we’ve got the national debt coopered, I wish they’d take a little hack 
at mine. I’ve put in fifty years farmin’, I never drank licker in any form. 
I’ve worked from ten to eighteen hours a day; been economical in cloze and 
hever went to a show more’n a dozen times in my life; raised a family and. 
learned upwards of two hundred calves to drink out of a tin pail without 
blowing all their vittles up my sleeve. My wife worked alongside 0’ me sewin’ 
new seats on the boys’ pants, skimmin’ milk, and even helpin’ me load hay. 

«« For forty years we toiled along together and hardly got time to look into 
each other’s faces or dared to stop and get acquainted with each other. Then 
her health ailed. Ketched cold in the spring-house, prob’ly skimmin’ milk 
and washin’ pans and scaldin’ pails and spankin’ butter. Anyhow, she took 

in along breath one day while the doctor and me was watchin’ her, and she 
says to me, ‘ Henry,’ says she, ‘I’ve got a chance to rest,’ and she put one 


nee Pe oc a 2 
hhGS, BE) NR Sg EE at eli ea ER 


“BAM URL s ‘COX. 


tired, wore-out hand on top of the other tired, wore-out hand, and I knew __ 


she’d gone where they don’t work all day and do chores all night. 


‘‘T took time to kiss her then. I’d been too busy fora good while previ- 


ous to that, and then I called in the boys. After the funeral it was too much 
for them to stay around and eat the kind of cookin’ we had to put up with, 
and nobody spoke up around the house as we used to. The boys quit 
whistlin’ around the barn and talked kind of low by themselves about goin’ 
to town and gettin’ a job. 

‘“‘They’re all gone now, and the snow is four feet deep on mother’s grave 
up there in the old berryin’ ground.” 


Then both of us looked out of the car window quite a long time without — t: 


saying anything. 

‘I don’t blame the boys for going into something else, ‘long’ s other things 
pays better; but I say—and I say what I know—that the man who holds the 
prosperity of this country in his hands, the man that actually makes money 
for other people to spend, the man that eats three good, simple, square meals 
a day and goes to bed at nine o’clock, so that future generations with good 
blood and cool brains can go from his farm to the Senate and Congress and 
the White House—he is the man that gets left at last to run his farm, with © 
- nobody to help him but a hired man and a high protective tariff. 

«The farms in our State are mortgaged for over $700,000,000. Ten of 
our Western States—I see by the papers—have got about three billion and a 
half mortgages on their farms, and that don’t count the chattel mortgages filed 
with town clerks on farm machinery, stock, wagons, and even crops, by gosh! 
that ain’t two inches high under the snow. That’s what the prospects is for 
farms now. The government is rich, but the men that made it, the men that 
fought perarie fires and perarie wolves and Injuns and potato-bugs and bliz- 
zards, and has paid the war debt and pensions and everything else, and 
hollered for the Union and Republican party and high tariff and anything 
else that they was told to, is left high and dry this cold winter with a mort- 
gage of $7,500,000,000 on the farms they have earned and saved a thonsand 
times over.” 

Yes; but look at the glory of sending from the farm the future President, 

the future Senator, and the future member of Congress. 

That looks well on paper, but what does it really amount to? Soon as a 
farmer boy gits in a place like that he forgets the soil that produced him and 

holds his head as high as a hollyhock. He bellers for protection to everybody 
but the farmer, and while he sails round in a highty-tighty room with a fire in 
it night and day, his father on the farm has to kindle his own fire in the morn- 
ing with elm slivers and has to wear his son’s lawn-tennis suit next to him or 
freeze to death, and he has to milk in-an old gray shawl that has held that 
member of Congress when he was a, baby, by gorry! and the old lady has to 
sojourn through the winter in the flannels that Silas wore at the riggatter 
before he went to Congress. 

So I say, and I think that Con pes agrees with me, Damn a farmer, any- 

how ! “ : 


- {Laughter.] 


oN oe ee See ee 


Se Na he TEAM U LI. OU aR Cone eee hn Ome are 


Suppose we should strike out all after the enacting clause of this 
bill and pass an amendment to tax all the farmer produces. "Would 
it not compel our manufacturer to pay the foreign price of it, and the 
tariff of 40 or 50 per cent. besides? Perhaps this would benefit the 


farmer, But how would it operate as to the manufacturer and the 


rest of the people? And where is the difference between such a tariff 


and the present one, except this, that the farmer’s ox is now gored, © 
and in the other case it would be the ox of the manufacturer? 


CORN-LAW REPEAL POETRY. 


Tam sure the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Butterworth], who joined 
his eloquent voice in the denunciation of the Cobdenites and the 
Democracy, must have observed how Tory protection was impov- 
erishing and decimating the Canadian Dominion for the lack of reci- 
procity. He must have observed the need of just such poetry for 


the North as the gentleman from Michigan quoted so exultantly in 


the conclusion of his speech for the South. 

_ By way of reciprocity, also, I would give the gentleman from Ohio 
a little gem which he can quote with reference to the protection 
anent the fish question, which he saw illustrated in Canada, and 


which is but a faint copy of what we have in this country. 


One of our own native singers, known as the ‘‘ Sweet Singer of 


- Michigan,” has given us a touching ode about the alligator. I com- 


mend it to the gentleman from Ohio, who has been studying the fish 
question in Canada: 
| How cheerfully he seems to grin, 
’ How neatly spreads his claws, 
And welcomes little fishes in 
With gently smiling jaws! 


COBDEN AND HIS CLUB SYMPATHIZERS WITH OUR UNION. 
It must not be forgotten that the men who founded the Cobden 
Club were the men who through the darkest hours of our own civil 
conflict, in and out of Parliament, were devoted toour Union. It was 


this school of Manchester that prevented the English cabinet from 
joining with the French Emperor in recognizing the Southern Con- | 


federacy and breaking the blockade. What ingrates, therefore, are 


these Republican lovers of the Union who join the Tories to attack — és 


the Cobden Club. These promoters of interchanges, by which both 
countries are benefited and neither injured, or who, in the language 


of General Garfield in this House, desired a point of stable equilibrium — 


upon our tariff, with a rate not so high as to keep foreign producers 


Boye apie aD ical wee ues 
TST Eas SPIE Cae erent ei eR ST? MET SG OR Sr Sect’ 
Pay Mer ear ha he SL bet ue Oat ae LINO paca Le Ty WE A 


altogether out of our markets or to stimulate the unnatural growth | 


of manufactures, but who, protective step by step, reach forward to 
the goal of free trade—these are the men who are the object of these 
tirades, in order to prejudice the ignorant against the liberal tariff 
reformers of our country. 

Why should you Republican ‘gentlemen be so indignant that 
members upon this side are members of the Cobden Club? If 
Cobden and the club favor a tariff for revenue, without the bur- 
dens which belong to a protective system, it only shows how sensible 
Cobden and the club are. Have not some of your best men favored 


such ideas? Has it not been proven in this debate that such Repub. 
lican leaders as President Garfield, Mr. Blaine, and: others who were 


their lieutenants and subordinates were marching in the same direc- 

tion? It matters not whether they belonged to an English club or 

not. It matters more what their sentiments were upon this theme. 

It proves nothing; but it is an ad hominem, and an estoppel upon 

_ their bravado. I challenge the other side to deny what I assert ta 

be the truth, that the Forty-second Congress, which elected Mr. 

Blainc its Speaker, was organized on a liberal and not upon a pro- 

tective basis. It ill becomes those who sustained Garfield and Blaine 

to call us to an account for the same ideas to which those Republican 
leaders gave their adhesion. 


I now assert that Blaine virtually made a bargain with the eT 


reformers shortly before his second election to the Speakership. It 
was to the effect that if they would not interfere with him in that 

election he would give them a majority of the Committee on Ways 
and Means of the Forty-second Congress. [Applause.] 


This compact was made— 


Writes a gentleman who knows the fact— 


and entered into at the Fifth Avenue Hotel during one of our revenue-reform 
meetings. Mr. Blaine— 


He says— 

was not at the meeting, but he was at the hotel, and he came there because the 
_tneeting was to be held there, as he told me at the time. He said, further, 
A that he came expressly to see us. We were all good Republicans then. It 
He was in our power to make ‘‘ Jordan a hard road to travel’’ for any candidate 
. for Speaker against whom we should unite. We had not thought of uniting 
% against Mr. Blaine, but we had thought of taking steps to give revenue reform 
a push in the House, and naturally the Speakership was the place to begin. 
Mr. Blaine knew that the meeting was to be held, and he came or ‘‘ happened 
in” just at the right time, but, as I have said, did not come to the meeting. 


He sent for me and asked us what we wanted. I told him that we wanted 


'» oe Se 
haa 


pe ee any ae ss ee es ee Finn eed Sone rh Be cat faa nag ue Ria a Aa Oe NG et Mak aacteniiat gaan oe 


some tariff-reform legislation, a to that end we wanted a Committee on 
Way and Means that could be depended upon. He said that he had always 
treated us fairly— 


[Laughter ]— 


and that he would do so still, but he could not give us the chairman. He did 


not say in so many words that he would give us a majority of the committee, 


but since the only way to get any reform legislation was by having a majority, 
we understood that ‘‘ treating us fairly” meant that precise thing, but that the 
other side would have the chairman. Otherwise we should have carried out 
our original intention of selecting a Western candidate for Speaker, and sup- 
porting him with all the votes and influence we could command. 

When Congress met Mr. Blaine was chosen without opposition. A few 
days later, and long before the committees were appointed, EugmENE Hae 
introduced his bills to repeal the duty on salt and coal. The latter was, I 
believe, turned over to General Farnsworth, HALE agreeing to support it. 
The debate and the vote you remember very well, because you took a lively 
hand in it. Both bills passed by two-thirds majority, as I recollect. 

This was at the short (first) session of the Forty-second Congress , beginning 


March 4, 1871. At the beginning of the second session the committees were 


announced, and, sure enough, Mr. Blaine had given us a majority, five of our 


men to four of the other side. Mr. Burchard, of Illinois, was put on, at my 


suggestion, as a Republican revenue-reformer who could be relied upon. Mr. 
Finkelnburg, of Missouri, was put on at Mr. GRosvVENOR’S suggestion. 


When the protectionists began to complain that they had been betrayed,” 
Mr. Blaine’s answer was, that he was the organ of the House and not of his 


own private views, whatever they might be; that the House had voted by very 
large majorities for the repeal of duties on coal and salt, and that he considered 


that an instruction to him to make the Committee of Ways and Means in 


harmony with those votes. This was really unanswerable, but if Mr. Kenumy 
and his following in the House had known what had gone before, what had 


taken place at the Fifth Avenue Hotel, they would not have been so easily 
appeased. 


ely 


‘1 [Laughter. ] 


We, who knew about the Fifth Avenue Hotel conference, always believed 
that Mr. Blaine put Mr. Hatz forward to introduce the salt and coal bills in 


order that he might afterwards say to Mr. Ke.iny and the high-tariff, that the — 


House had instructed him, etc. It is certain that Blaine helped all he could to 
get the bills passed. General John F. Farnsworth can testify fully on that 


point. 


That distinguished statesman and soldier [saw here a moment 


ago. 
A MEMBER. He is here. 


Mr. Cox. I am happy to have his presence to set at rest this 
matter. I doubt not he will confirm my statement and that of the 


wi ‘SAMUBL Me S940 8 


= 


other gentleman, my correspondent. [General Farnsworth ‘bows: 4 
acquiescence.] [Applause.] The gentleman bows his assent. The — I 
committee as constituted at that time had a liberal chairman, whose | 


speeches indicate his tendency. But outside of the chairman, Mr. 
Dawes, of Massachusetts, there were three Democrats, Brooks, 
Kerr, and Breck, and two Republicans—Burchard and Finkelnburg, 
which gave a majority in favor of the reduction of the tariff accord- 
ing to the policy laid down by such advanced thinkers as Garfield, 
ALLISON, Logan, and others. 


Now, with what sort of grace and with what abundant arrogance 


these gentlemen, who are now arraying themselves with the relict 
feathers of the ‘‘Plumed Knight,” sent from Paris and Florence, 
and saluting him as the great vindicator of protection against the 
heresies of President Cleveland—can these gentlemen from Maine 
and other States thrust any foreign club, even when it como3 


in the form of an Irish shillelah, under our eyes? [Laughter.] Lc% 


them deny the statement I make and I will produce the proof. Tho 
proof will show that their trusted leaders, if not all members of the 
Cobden Club, were as nearly associated in principle with it as any 


_ gentlemen who have been so truculently arraigned by the Tory pro- 


tectionists of this House. [Applause. ] 


CORN-LAW INVOCATIONS FOR THE DAWN. 
I listened with rapturous delight to the murmurous river of 


breath which flowed so sweetly from the gentleman from Michigan — 


[Mr. Burrows]. Iam sorry I do not see him here. 

A Member. Here he is. 

Mr. Cox. I am happy to see his roseate face. He made a gallant 
plea for American industry, capital, and labor against the whole 
world. That is the title of his pamphlet. It is a superb premise 
of a grand speech. His quiet style, his polished periods and musical 
tone enraptured his side of the House, but it did not listen to 
his speech as I did. It has not read it since, as I have, between the 
lines. 

It convinced me of the futilities of placing shackles upon free- 
dom. It confirmed my belief that a home market, when good at 


‘home, would be still better when extended. It was intended to 


show, although he did not seem to say so, that the bill which has 
been introduced by the Committee of Ways and Means was but a 
little thing, and, as he hinted, uatelenconely begotten i in the dark. 
[Laughter. ] 


The gentleman from Michigan never foenin as I judge by his 


conclusion—and I hope the House will bear with me until I reach it 


(Bs he oie ak a RRM as ae Sem ate Spay eae 
Bi bids onli Ne Sere Me ats bak tik hey ke 
eae Thy Eee, Mo eae, ry 


Pe RAMUEL 8 COR 0 SES 


—to give forth the impression that we should be restricted in our 
markets, and that abundance was not a benefaction, and the de- 
privat?on of food and shelter and clothing not a curse.. Oh, no! 


4 But in the conclusion of his speech truth crept in on his natural 


P oratory, and lo! like Silas Wegg, he dropped into poetry. [Laugh- 
ter.| As a devoted friend of freedom he could not conclude his 


eloquent speech without something ostensibly in favor of freedom. 


{Laughter.] “Vhat an invocation it was when he quoted the poetry 
of Charles Mackay! I applaud him for it; so did the Republican > 
side applaud him, without knowing the covert and exquisite satire - 
of his performance. 


The gentleman saw in the limited relief of this bill ‘untoward 


circumstances to retard the South in her material progress;” he 
rallied the South, and bid her ‘‘ march forth unimpeded to a splendid © 


industrial future.” Rising to a splendid climax he sounded the 
advance for the South. He rejoiced in the ‘‘ New South, a new 
industrial South, born of the throes of war, but full of hope and full 


of courage.” Indeed, it was the consummated flower of oratory. 


_ nith of that glorious day” of British free trade, ‘‘the North and | 
the South, cemented in the indissoluble bonds of commercial and 


He saw the South standing ‘‘ with uplifted brow facing the dawn of 


a mighty future; her loins girt for a new race. With unfettered 
hands,” and, ah! here came out the grand peroration of his splendid | 


speech, ‘‘ with unfettered hand she smites the earth! The fountains 
of unmeasured wealth gush forth! Beneath her feet she feels the 


stir of a marvelous life. Her pathway is already illumed with the 


light of blazing furnaces. Her heavens are aglow with the break of 


anew day! All hail its oncoming!” 


And then, with one grand, magnificent bound he leaps upon his 


ae Bellerophon and rides the winged steed of his imperial fancy. 


Aid the dawning, tongue and pen; 
Aid it, hopes of honest men; 
Aid it, paper; aid it type; 
Aid it, for the hour is ripe, 
And our earnest must not slacken into play. 


_ Then he calls on the ‘‘ men of thought,” the ‘‘ men of action” on 
every side to ‘‘clear the way.” What way? The way which the 
muse of Mackay pointed out; the very way which Cobden had blazed 
out. ‘Clear the way,” so that ‘‘ when the sun shall reach the Ze- 


” 


fraternal unity,” will march together for ‘‘ grander industrial tri- 


~ umphs.”. ae 
___ Whata splendid burst of free-trade eloquence is this! Like the 


_ 


nie 
Se 
5 


oe oi 3.2 ae eg ey, Tak i Set ai ac ne” aN 
i es 8 A ee ae kOe ae PENA Me Weg 
Mi 


834. To PO RAE 6. Ook 


oe 


palm of Zealand, when it puts forth its flower, its sheaf bursts with 
a report that echoes through the forest like thunder! Even so, 
through the lumber regions of Michigan let this dawn of Cobden 
free trade light up the bosky recesses and give cheer to the lumber- 
man as he toils through wintry privations. Not satisfied with his 
own glowing sentences, he summons the poet of the Cobden Club, 
the friend of Cobden, the companion of Ebenezer Elliott, the co 
worker with John Bright, the co-laborer with Sir Robert Peel, who 
sang the song of the cheap loaf, free trade, and a regenerated Great 
Britain ! 
I never dreamed till I heard my friend give forth his trumpet- 
sound for British free trade how ennobling was the cause! You will 
say that perhaps he only adopted the words without meaning. But 
I will not believe it of so intelligent and cultivated and liberal a 
member as the accomplished gentleman. 
_ It reminded me of astory. May I relieve the discussion by its’ 
relation? Itis about a Baptist boy down in Virginia who desired to 
join the Baptist Church and be immersed. Perhaps the Baptist 
clergymen who fill yonder gallery may recall the circumstance. 
_{Laughter.] The boy was named Jim. He is called to give in his 
experience before the deacons. They desire to know how he got ~ 
religion. He told them: ‘‘I dreamed that I saw Jacob’s ladderand — 
Jacob a-wrastling with the angels, and I heard a voice saying, ‘Jim, 
climb dat ladder;’ and I clumb [laughter] and I clumb; then another 


~ voice from de clouds came down, saying, ‘ Jim, climb on;’ and I 


clomb and I clomb till I got to the last round of de ladder. Den I 
hear a voice of de angels and of the crystal gates, saying, ‘Climb on!’ 
and I say, ‘Good Lord, I can’t climb no mo’.’ Den the voice ring 
out and say, ‘Jump, Jim; jump!’ an’I jump, an’ dis chile got the 
damdest fall since de fall of Adam.” [Long-continued laughter.] — 
Was this invocation to free trade limited to my distinguished 
friend from Michigan? By no means. Other gentlemen hearing 
him arose and also cried out to aid the dawn!—the same old dawn! — 
But we gentlemen on this side of the House are content simply with _ 
a reform which relieves us of 7 per cent. out of the 47 burden, and 
for purposes of business to prevent the accumulations in the Treas- _ 
ury of the moneys of the people. 
Now I propose to signalize this conversion of my friend from _ 
Michigan and his brethren who have echoed this song of the dawn 
of British free trade. I do not propose to be harsh toward them. I 
would like to see him not only assist but be assisted in clearing out 
the way. He will have his troubles by the way. The dawn may be — 


ie se cf a 


| SAMUEL Woe 00x. 


- clouded and = paper ard type too heavily laden ae tax to be 
useful in a clearing. 

It would be a glorious Pa EAOn of this debate could we only 
have gentlemen on the other side join in this invocation to paper and 
_ to type and to the hearts of honest men to clear the way for British- 
Cobden free trade. And what part in this clearance would be taken 
_ by the gentleman who represents the little State of Nevada, with its 
41 per cent. of foreign-born people and its 45,000 inhabitants? Will 
he join in the hymn when my friend from Michigan lines it out ? 
_ And what will our other brethren of the Republican party do when iG 
_ Brother Brumm raises his ‘‘Ebenezer.” [Laughter.] Iwouldliketo 
line out the inspiring verse. (Laughter. ] i : 

Gentlemen need not rise to sing. If the tariff were not so highI | 
* would have purchased a tuning-fork for the occasion. ‘‘ Aid the 
dawning!” Sing! But, gentlemen, you do not sing. [Laughter.] i 
Surely such an ecstasy as that produced by Mackay’s verse, so well 
recited by the gentleman, must have stirred your hearts to music. 
_ [Laughter.] Or perhaps we had better have a prayer meeting. 
(Laughter. | 
It would be indecorous on my pal to say that gentlemen on the 
_ other side who have been quoting the poetry of free trade with such 
"wild enthusiasm were ignorant of the source from which this inspira- 
tion came. I fear lam responsible for this gushing lyric, for I used 
it in our caucus to break the dead-lock so as to aid the dawning of 
our reform. [Laughter.] My friend from Kansas [Mr. Perkins] 
- somehow got into our caucus. I think it was not intentional, for I 
have seen no signs of repentance and conversion. [Laughter.] He 
_ may have carried the burden of Mackay’s song to the accomplished 
gentleman from Michigan, and hence the dawn. 
[recall another verse of this poet of the people in which he plead “| 
_ go earnestly that the operative of England should have leave to earn a 
__ his daily bread by his skill and to buy it where he would. 


What do wé want? Our daily bread; 
And trade untrammeled as the wind; 

And from our ranks shall spirits start, 
To aid the progress of mankind. 


It was for the dawning of that day that he sung the song so elo- 
_ quently quoted by the gentleman from Michigan. It was nota Brit- — 
ish song. It was the song of a lover of his kind. When this distin- 
guished poet came to America he again appealed for that same hu- 
“man liberty which had been secured in England. I commend his 
verse to my friends on the other side: % 


To the West, to the West, to the land of the free, 
Where mighty Missouri rolls down to the sea, 
Where a man is a man if he is willing to toil, 
And the humblest may gather the fruits of the soil. 


THE LIBERTY OF LABOR. 


Why should not these men who are the anti-slavery propagan- 


dists and prophets have favored the principles of Cobden in the in- — 


terest of liberty? Does not slavery, like the restriction of ex- — 
changes, prohibit the producer from using the products of his own 


- Jabor according to his own pleasure and advantage? Does it not, _ 


like slavery, deprive the individual of at least a portion of the results 
of his labor without return? There was no warrant in England, — 
there is no warrant here, either by natural laws, or state laws, or 
constitutional requirement to restrict such freedom of exchange for 


the personal or class interests of any one, any more than thereisa — 


warrant for a state religion or the abridgment of speech, press, and 

suffrage. [Applause. ] , 
Why should the United States with its elements of prosperity and 

power and its institutions of equality and freedom isolate itself as if 


it were Japan or Corea? Nay, why should it, when these Oriental : 


countries are opening their ports to the world, be laggard in the — 
race of commercial advancement? The history of mankind during ~ 
all the ages displays no such fatuity. 


LOW TARIFFS OF HISTORY. 


Why, in Athens two thousand years ago a 10 per cent. revenue 
duty was regarded as an outrage. Five per cent. was the highest. 
In ancient Rome from 2} to 5 per cent. was the highest maximum. — 
In Turkey—may I refer to my friend again? [laughter]—8 per cent. is 

. the tax on all foreign importations. 3 

Our First Congress made some showing of protective duties, but ‘i 
the average was only 8} per cent., and, the duties we have now on ~ 
cottons, woolens, and iron that now run above 50 per cent. were — 
then onty 5. 
_ Why, we have had forty changes in the tariff since our first en- 


actment. It has always been protective until 1846, when it was lib- — 
eralized; so that by 1860 it reached an average as low as 17 per cent. 
Then the war came on, which was exceptional. We then began to 


tinker with the tariff over and over again, until we have our present . 
enactment. | 

It is the habit of gentlemen to minimize the amount of taxation — 
by skowing how small per capita each particular tax is upon! ou our — 


F BPMPDalsss sau eae Sot pe regen we 


eAMURL & COX 


_ people. Thus they infer that since it only takes 8 cents on one 
thing, 5 cents on another, and 10 on another, that we ought not to 
complain. But many a mickle makes a muckle, and the day of 
small things ought not to be despised. 


THE LITTLENESS OF TARIFF RESTRICTIONS, 


Why, when we think of it, our star itself is but a little thing in 


space compared with the glories of our planetary and other systems. 
_ Itis hardly a grain of sand amid the stellar spaces. 

: Professor Langley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, con- 
cludes his volume on the New Astronomy by a story which he relates 
of a race of ephemeral insects who live but an hour. They die of 
old age just after the sun rises. Their descendants may live on 
till mid-day, while it is another race which sees the glory of 
sunset. 


Imagine such a scene as sunset— 
gays the Professor— 


-when the whole nation of mites gather under the shadow of some mushroom 
to hear what their wisest philosopher has to say of the gloomy prospect. He 
_ tells them of the time when the mushroom itself was young, and when the sun 
was in another portion of the sky; then that the sun had changed its course, 
and that all nature was about to be resolved into a fleeting nebulous mist. 
_ What the hearers of such a philosophic mite would think of his philosophy the 
infinite God only knows. 


But it seems to me that the philosophers of our time who under- 
take to limit the comforts and happiness and means of living of a 
few mites under one portion of the mushroom, and to that portion 
_ only, are very much in the position of the ephemera, who talk about 

the laws of nature, as if they could constrain them to their own 
selfish will. [Applause.] 


THE AMERICAN QUADRICENTENNIAL, 


Four hundred years ago Columbus set in the forehead of his time 
the jewels of Elizabeth the Catholic by the discovery of America. 
- Weare preparing for the celebration of that remarkable event. The 
people of the three Americas will be called together to give gratula- 
tion over this marvelous fact in the history of our star. 
_-Four hundred years ago the red man. held uibdisputed and bar- 
_barie sway over the vast region now embraced within our limits. 


- Out of this wilderness has arisen from the loins of the old ke a. 


nation who Ad and boast of their liberties. 


“as | SAMUEL 8 00x. pa 


; 
a 
5 
4 
a 
* 


OUR ADVANCEMENT AND HOROSCOPE. 
Have we not a right to rejoice and boast? Has not our greatness 


expanded like the oak, bole upon bole, ring upon ring, from sea to 


sea, from Gulf to Lake? Our benevolence, and learning, and wealth, 


and splendor, and commerce have become the cynosure of all eyes, 


even as our country is the refuge of all peoples. We need not repair 


the light of liberty in our own. We have what Rufus Choate called 
a youthful, exultant, and defiant freedom, enshrined and conse- 
erated, and now happily united with one sentiment and under | one 
Constitution. 


: LABOR AND LIBERTY SHACKLED. : 
With all this wonderful experience and accomplishment, beyond 


to the urns of other skies or to the policies of other lands to illumine — 


the wildest dreams of that classic genius which pictured a new At- 


lantis and an ideal commonwealth beyond the Hesperian star, shall 
these be shackled by a wrongful constraint? Shall that economy 


which ever walks white-handed along with its sister—liberty—fail of — 


that guiding effulgence which makes glad the enthusiasm of our 
people? Why should our struggling millions aspire to a better 
future? Why should they lay up the treasures of their enterprises, 
if, indeed, the spirit of freedom be wanting? Freedom not only to 
work as we please, but to dispose of the product of our work as we 
please; freedom to spend our money where we'can get the most for 


it, and freedom to make that money without the ignominy of enalay: 


ing statutes! - 
What avail the plow and sail, 
Or land or life, if freedom fail ? 


Exursit No. 1.—Bastiat’s famous petition. 


Petition of the manufacturers of candles, wax-lights, lamps, candlesticks, 
street-lamps, snuffers, extinguishers, and of the producers of oil, tallow, rosin, 


alcohol, and generally of everything connected with lighting. 


To Messiewrs the members of the Chamber of Deputies: 


GENTLEMEN: You are on the right road. You reject abstract theories and ; 


have little consideration for cheapness and plenty. Your chief care is the 
interest of the producer. You desire to emancipate him from external com- 
petition and reserve the national market for national industry. 


_ We are about to offer you an admirable opportunity for applying your— — 


what shall we call it? your theory? .No; nothing is more deceptive than 


theory. Your doctrine? your system? your principle?—but you dislike 


én al Bs 
Sy ste se 


PAMONN 800K a BROS 


doctrines, you abhor systems, and as for principles, you deny that there are 
any in social economy; we shall say, then, your practice, your practice with- 


out theory and without principle. 


We are suffering from the intolerable competition of a foreign Heal: placed, 
it would seem, in a condition so far superior to ours for the production of 
light, that he absolutely inundates our national market with it at a price fabu- 
lously reduced. The moment he shows himsclf, our trade leaves us—all con- 
sumers apply to him; and a branch of native industry, having countless 
ramifications, is all at once rendered completely stagnant. This rival, who is 
no other than the sun, wages war to the knife against us, and we suspect he 
has been raised up by perfidious Albion (good policy as times go); inasmuch 
as he displays toward that haughty island a circumspection with which he 
dispenses in our case. 

What we pray for is, that it may please you to pass a law ordering the 
shutting up of all windows, sky-lights, dormer windows, outside and inside 
shutters, curtains, blinds, bull’s eyes, in a word, of all openings, holes, chinks, 
clefts, and fissures, by or through which the light of the sun has been allowed 
to enter houses, to the prejudice of the meritorious manufactures with which 


we flatter ourselves we have accommodated our country, a country which, ip: 


gratitude, ought not to abandon us now to a strife so unequal. 
_ We trust, gentlemen, that you will not regard this our request as a satire 
or refuse it without at least previously hearing the reasons which we have to 


urge in its support. 


And, first, if you shut up as much as possible all access to natural light, and 


create a demand for artificial light, which of our French manufactures will 


not be encouraged by it? 
If more tallow is consumed, then therc must be more oxen and sheep; 


and, consequently, we shall behold the increase of artificial meadows, meat, 


- wool, hides, and, above all, manure, which is the basis and foundation of all 


agricultural wealth. 
If more oil is consumed, then we shall have an extended cultivation of the 


poppy, of the olive, and of colewort. These rich and exhausting plants will 


come at the right time to enable us to avail ourselves of the increased fertility 


which the rearing of additional cattle will impart to our lands. 


- Our heaths will be covered with resinous trees. Numerous swarms of 
bees will on the mountains gather perfumed treasures, now wasting their 
fragrance on the desert air, like the flowers from which they are derived. 
No branch of agriculture but will then exhibit a cheering development. 

The same remark applies to navigation. Thousands of vessels will proceed 


to the whale-fishery; and, in a short time, we shall possess a navy capable of: 


maintaining the honor of France, and gratifying the patriotic aspirations of 
your petitioners, the undersigned candlemakers and others. 
But what shall we say of the manufacture of articles de Paris? Henceforth 


you will behold gildings, bronzes, crystals, in candlesticks, in lamps, in lustres, 
- in candelabra, shining forth in spacious warerooms, compared with which 


those of the present day can be regarded but as mere shops. © 


340. a AMAL Be OKO 


No poor Resinier from his heights on the seacoast, no coal-miner from the 


depth of his sable gallery, but will rejoice in higher wages and increased pros-. 


perity. 

Only have the goodness to reflect, gentlemen, and you will be convinced 
that there is, perhaps, no Frenchman, from the wealthy coal-master to the 
humblest vender of lucifer matches, whose lot will not be ameliorated by 
the success of this our petition. 

We foresee your objections, gentlemen, but we know that you can oppose 
to us none but such as you have picked up from the effete works of the par- 
tisans of free trade. We defy you to utter a single word against us which 
will not instantly rebound against yourselves and your entire policy. 

You will tell us that if we gain by the protection which we seek the country 
will lose by it, because the consumer must bear the loss. 

We answer: 

You have ceased to have any coe to invoke the interest of the consumer; 
for, whenever his interest is found opposed to that of the producer you 
sacrifice the former. You have done so for the purpose of encouraging labor 
and increasing employment. For the same reason you should @p so again. 

You have yourselves obviated this objection. When you are told that the 
consumer is interested in the free importation of iron, coal, corn, textile fabrics 
—yes, you reply, but the producer is interested in their exclusion. Well, be 
it so. If the consumers are interested in the free admission of natural light, 
- the producers of artificial light are equally interested in its prohibition. 


* 

aa 
es 

15. 

] ge 

4 7 4 

‘ se eae + pe ee Pe con 

Se ee ees ee 


But again, you may say that the producer and consumer are identical. If — 


the manufacturer gain by protection he will make the agriculturist also a 
gainer, and if agriculture prospers it will open a vent to manufacturers. Very 
well; if you confer upon us the monopoly of furnishing light during the day, 
first of all we shall purchase quantities of tallow, coals, oils, resinous sub- 
stances, wax, alcohol, besides silver, iron, bronze, crystal, to carry on our 
manufactures; and then we and those who furnish us with such commodities, 
having become rich, will consume a great deal and impart prosperity to all 
_ the other branches of our national industry. 


If you urge that the light of the sun is a gratuitous gift of nature, and that 
to reject such gifts is to reject wealth itself under pretense of encouraging the — 


means of acquiring it, we would caution you against giving a death-blow to 


your own policy. Remember that hitherto you have always repelled foreign : 


products, because they approximate more nearly than home products to the 
character of gratuitous gifts. To comply with the exactions of other monopo- 
lists, you have only half a motive; and to repulse us simply because we stand 
on a stronger vantage ground than others would be to adopt the equation 
+ x += -—-; in other words, it would be to heap absurdity upon absurdity. 

Nature and human labor co-operate in various proportions (depending on 


countries and climates) in the production of commodities. The part which - 
nature executes is always gratuitous; it is the part executed by human labor — 


- which constitutes value, and is paid for. 


If a Lisbon orange sells for half the price of a Paris orange, it is because ‘ae 


gl, Fae ae igh ak: Ee ee 


BAM. URL, 6. cox. 


natural, an dconsequently gratuitous, heat does for the one arhint artificial, and 
_ therefore expensive, heat must do for the other. 
When an orange comes to us from Portugal, we may concedes that it is 2 
. furnished in part gratuitously, in part for an onerous consideration; in other a 
words, it comes to us at half-price as compared with those of Paris. es 
_ Now, it is precisely the gratuitous half (pardon the word) which we domain bs 
_ should be excluded. You say, how can national labor sustain competition | 
- with foreign labor, when the former has all the work to do, and the latter only 
does-one half—the sun supplying the remainder? But if this half, being gra- 
tuitous, determines you to exclude competition, how should the whole, being 
- gratuitous, induce you to admit competition? If you were consistent, you 
would, while excluding as hurtful to native industry what is half gratuitous, 
exclude, a fortior? and with double zeal, that which is altogether gratuitous. 
Once more, when products such as coal, iron, corn, or textile fabrics are 
sent us from abroad, and we can acquire them with less labor than if we made 
them ourselves, the difference is a free gift conferred upon us. The gift is 
- more or less considerable in proportion as the difference is more or less great. 


as So laa 


It amounts to a quarter, a half, or three-quarters of the value of the product, a 
when the foreigner only asks us for three-fourths, a half, or a vine of 4 
the price we should otherwise pay. a 


. It is as perfect and complete as it can be, when the donor (like the sun in 
- ,furnishing us with light) asks us for nothing. The question, and we ask it 
formally, is this, Do you desire for our country the benefit of gratuitous con- 
sumption, or the pretended advantages of onerous production? Make your 
- choice, but be logical; for aslong as you exclude, as you do, coal, iron, corn, ; 
foreign fabrics, in proportion as their price approximates to zero, what incon- 
~ sistency would it be to admit the light of the sun, the price of which is already 
at zero during the entire’ day! 


EXxurprr No. 2.—Ezports of wheat and corn (including flour and meal) from the 
United States in five-year periods, each ended in the years named. 


Years. @ Wheat- Corn. 
ne 
Bushels. Bushels. 

TRAD eee citi te ee a re Pr ee IN Nr th ATE a Setyene sine ale Wek So ah g othe 23,385,247 6,664,342 
EE sane ee Sak eae sae teeb viet raat pees 26,823,965 5,838,478 
RR a Ud ww hala p's poe Bin wse esis yeteed¢ ¥< bieleibe wie e 22,307,501 4,560,693 
ee kee coseds cu padedesecceeesecsems sina's 34,320,346 _ 8,005,105 
PRIMO oa) tora c sie dicta ac orcecn ee cc ac bole sisie'stle sc siefelsdis eelaaiscecesa’s 71,608,785 53,796,953 
PRR cists aieiere oe PO afer hy Fat Dre eg PR ate nies wis OH ac eine ears} 82. 194, 545 28,391,020 
TRCN ER ae Oe sce deat toad Ses enee< J a Sy Mire Mau Ee I 117,699,913 32,763,264 
ra ets Wi aL ET SLL sighs «ebsites lee ees nee eae mabe tines aces 237° 095, 572 57,318,456 
ee oor es abc dein occ wield ¥ oeen owls es pensis.ae'S eos 139:082,289 53,418,372 
eee tae ee casein ens ceb sess eee sibs de eee sees es oece ses 307,897,584 152,569, 127 
Bos bal ctale re cs oe aise wie TSE aie dd aais ar OTT lage MUN spre Sintlaer sib arib(e ool e's wares 546,314,817 398, 212.474 
Te SC ils. anya S vies ose eeedneehs cbdngeeds nets agive 608,374,048 278,779,545 


SAMUEL 8. COX. 


Exursrr No. 8.—Production and export of cotton. 


Since 1874 the statement of production is that of the cotton movement by the National — 
Cotton Exchange. The earlier statements, both product and export, are from Dana’s © 
** Cotton from Seed to Loom.” ~ . — 


git Years. Production. | Exportation, 

2 

iy Bales Bales. 
957,281 853,798 
720,593 : 
857,744 749,000 
976,845 838,194 
1,088,847 T2177 

‘ 987,477 891,501 . 

a 1,070,438 867,169 

¥ 1,205,394 1,027,569 

1,254,328 1,023,018 
1,360,725 1,116,044 
1,425,575 1,167,805 
1,804,797 1,575,848 
1,363,403 1,072,935 
2,181,749 1,873,408 
1,639,353 1,811,785 

: 1,688,675 1,459,957 

ae 2,394,203 2,005,395 

ir 2,108,579 1,625,965 

‘: 2,484,662 2,079,721 
2,170,537 1,666,443 
1,860,479 1,240,869 
2,424,113 1,857,889 
2,808,596 2,226,722 
2,171,706 1,588,814 
2,415,257 1,987,633 
3,090,029 2,448,103 > 
8,352,882 | - 2,526,545 
3,085,027 2,317,585. 90 
2.932,339 9.248, 818 
3,645,845 2,953,771 
3,056,519 2,251,496 
3,238,962 2,589,732 
8,994,481 3,020,519 

\ 4,823,770 8,778,256 
3,826,086 3,126,867 
2,228,987 | 1,552,457 
2,059,271 1,552,761 
2,498,895 1,657,015 


RRS Seedy oS 


HON. WILLIAM D. KELLEY, 


OF PENNSYLVANIA, 
(Republican Side.) 


In the course of an address delivered at Corsicana, Tex., on 
the 21st of May last, the distinguished gentleman who now presides 
over the deliberations of the Committee on Ways and Means said: 


We produced and exchange among ourselves and consume in the satisfaction 

-of our wants more of the products of our own labor than the two hundred 
millions on the continent. of Europe. We have invented and have now in 
successful operation more labor-saving machinery than all other people. We 
_,are turning out over six thousand millions of dollars’ worth of products of 
manufactures every year, and producing them at lower cost of production, 
and at the same time paying higher wages to our workmen than any other 
- people. 


As I read this tribute to the enterprise, energy, and thrift of his 
countrymen, I hoped-to find that the speaker had supplemented it 
_ by telling his hearers that the fostering influence of protective tariffs 
had in less than a quarter of a century lifted us from the national 
_ bankruptcy, to which we had been reduced by the revenue tariffs of 
- 1846 and 1857 and had exalted us to the lofty prominence among 
nations he so glowingly described. He could have supported these 
statements by reference to the report of the census for 1880, which 
shows that our manufacturing establishments numbered at that time 
more than a quarter of a million, employed $2,790,272, 606 of capital, 
and paid 2,788,895 Mantiacnirine operatives the higher rates of 
_ wages to which he referred. 
In view of these magnificent triumphs, which were possibly only 
_ by reason of the defense by the xgis of protection of our industries 
_against overwhelming foreign assaults, I will be pardoned for entering 
an emphatic protest against the adoption of a measure which bears 
_ his name, and which, if its purpose may be inferred from its provis- 
_ ions, is intended to overthrow that system and scatter to the winds 
| the magnificent results achieved in less than a quarter of a century 
343 


Ads WILLIAM D. KELLEY. 


instantly paralyze the enterprise and energy of the people. Under — 
the baleful influence of such a law the report of the census of 1890 
will announce the overthrow of our manufacturing supremacy and 
the reduction of our commanding commercial position to that of 
colonial dependence. It is studiouly designed to produce these dire 
results, and nicely adapted to its purpose. [Applause.] — 


under its fostering influence. .The enactment of this bill would 4 
gi 
a 


of 4 x & aan 
at. i eee a fic 


A PARTISAN MEASURE. 


It is confessedly a partisan measure, and was framed in thein- © 
terest of a party whose leaders appear to be oblivious to the over- — 
whelming social and economic changes wrought by the abolition of 
slavery. As slavery was an industrial system which permitted — 
capital to own its laborers and was adapted exclusively to the pro- — 
duction of great agricultural staples, its prevalence prevented such 
aggregations of people in mining, manufacturing, and commercial 
towns and cities as would result from the development of the mate- 
rial resources and commercial possibilities of the South. Its abolition 
involved as inevitable consequences two changes which would be felt 
on every plantation and in every household throughout the territory — 
in which the system prevailed. Neither of these consequences could 
be averted; they were both as inevitable as fate. The first was the — 
creation of an imperative demand for remunerative employment for 
the millions of emancipated slaves, who as freemen must be invested 
with the privilege of earning their bread in the sweat of their faces, — 
and providing for the sustenance and care of their families and the — 
maintenance of homes. Involved in this change were also millions — 
of poor and illiterate whites whose chief dependence for precarious — 
subsistence had been the snare or trap and the gun and rod. | 

The demand for employment that would produce wages and sub- — 
sistence was for these landless millions, as I have said, as jmpenanipas 
as fate. It could be neither resisted nor evaded. Yet it could not, 
consistently with the infirmities of human nature, be promptly 
acquiesced in by those who had inherited slaves as transmissible — 
property, and been taught to regard poor whites as dangerous neigh- _ 
bors. 

But for the presence of military power an era of lawlessness and — 
strife would have followed these sudden and momentous modifica- 
tions of the industrial and social conditions of the people of anum- — 
ber of great States. Happily for all parties it became apparent to — 
many Southern men before the army was withdrawn that these — 
changes were not as had been believed, a desolating dispensation, 


but were a bounteous providence, which, as a return for the Poy: ! 


mart . aes pete ‘tiers Sis ali aha ati Gar aah? Sg eh a Pai Regn yaa i) Neh es OF Pept a a ee 


WILLIAM D. KHLLEY. 345 


ment of living wages to pee landless millions for labor performed 
in the diversification of the agriculture of their fertile empire and 


the utilization of its exhaustless supplies of minerals for manufac- 
- ture, promised greater wealth, more perfect security for life and 


order, and higher developments of civilization than they dreamed of 


in the palmy days when they had counted their acres by the thou- | 


sand and their slaves by the hundreds. Yet, strange to say, the 
gentlemen who framed this bill, and who could brook neither modi- 
fication nor discussion of its provisions by their associates in the 


committee to which the preparation of revenue bills is confided by 


oe law, are with but two exceptions representatives of what was slave 


territory. 


Contemplating the bill in the light of these facts one involuntarily 
recurs to the French maxim ‘‘That the Bourbons neither learn nor 
forget,” for an examination of its provisions will satisfy unbiased 
minds that they have no adaptation to the existing industrial and 


- financial condition of the country, but would have been nicely 


“a adapted to the era during which the exigencies of slavery demanded 


the maintenance of free foreign trade and the repression of mining 


and manufacturing throughout our broad domain. 


THE BILL IS AN ANACHRONISM. 


Yes, the bill is an anachronism; it has no relation to this era; it 
belongs. to the saddest epoch in our national history, the period - 
_ between 1824 and 1861. During that period slavery dominated our 


national councils and guided the administration of our national 
affairs, in hostility to national interests, and in the interestiof free 
‘trade twice threatened war. It was in the interest of free trade that 
war was threatened in support of the doctrine of nullification, and 


_ it was in the interest of free trade that the country was involved for 


- more than four years in a fratricidal war, the proportions of which 
were more gigantic than ever characterized a civil war. The entire 


South knows that free trade was essential to the perpetuity of slav- 
ery in the Republic, and it should also know that the logic that 
could defend free trade in a country endowed with the boundless 


z diversity of the elements of manufacture and the immense supply of 


the forces for their conversion which we enjoy, vanished when slav- 


x ery was abolished. 


THE REQUIREMENTS OF KING COTTON. 


This is not mere theory; it is historic fact.. Allow me to prove it — 


to you and the country. It is now nearly thirty years since Prit- 


chard, Abbott, and Loomis, of Augusta, Ga., printed, to be sold 
_ exclusively by subscription, this volume of more than 900 pages, by 


her 

é seg 
ae 
2 
ae 
4 

= OO 
1 


cee 


; 
i 
Se, 
DS 
. ee 
hi 

i 

Sie 
xi oe 
“A 
ay 


tion as the planters can devote their attention to cotton, sugar, rice, or tobacco. 


346 : WILLIAM D. KELLEY. 


extracts from which I propose to demonstrate the accuracy of the — 
position I have just announced. Its title is ‘‘Cotton is King, and 

Pro-Slavery Arguments, comprising writings by Hammond, Harper, _ 
Christy, Stringfellow, Hodge, Bledsoe, and Cartwright on these im- 
portant subjects.” It was edited by E. N. Elliott, LL.D., president 
of the Planters’ College of Mississippi, who also contributed to its — 
contents an essay on ‘‘ Slavery in the light of international law.” It _ 
is illustrated with fine engravings of the great and logical expound- ~ 
ers of the philosophy which regarded the maintenance of human 

slavery as the supreme object of the American people and the 

Government of the United States. Here is that of the Editor of the 
volume, Dr. Elliott, to whom I have just alluded; here is that of — 
David Christy, who gave to the volume the title ‘‘ Cotton is King, or 

Slavery in the Light of Political Economy;” here is Albert Taylor 

Bledsoe, LL.D., professor of mathematics in the University of Vir- 

ginia, who contributed an essay entitled ‘‘ Liberty and slavery, and — 
slavery in the light of moral and political philosophy,” and hereis 
J. H. Hammond, United States Senator from South Carolina, who 
gave to the anti-slavery agitators of the country the phrase ‘‘ North- © 
ern mudsills,” as his characterization of the laboring men and 

women of that section, with which to inflame the passions of the © 
entire laboring community of the North. There are also striking 
portraits of other apostles of the doctrine that slavery was national — 
and freedom sectional, but I must not spend too much time on that 
part of the volume. I therefore proceed to submit the following — 
extracts from its pages, which will serve to show that this bill was 
prepared in accordance with the requirements of the obsolete doc- 
trines of this volume. 


i 


Se 


aR ile Preah dee Nate art Me OP To | 


Slave labor has seldom been made profitable where it has been wholly em- : 
ployed in grazing and grain-growing: but it becomes remunerative in propor- 


To render Southern slavery profitable in the highest degree, therefore, the 
slaves must be employed upon some one of these articles, and be sustained by 
a supply of food and draught animals from Northern agriculturists. * * * 
The attempt of the agricultural States, thirty years since, to establish the 
protective policy, and promote ‘‘ domestic manufactures,” was a struggle to 
create such a division of labor as would afford a ‘“‘ home market” for their 
products, no longer in demand abroad. The first decisive action on the ques- — 
tion by Congress was in 1824; when the distress in these States, and the meas- — 
ures proposed for thcir relief by national legislation, were discussed on the 
passage of the “tariff bill” of that year. The ablest men in the nation were — 
engaged in the controversy. As provisions are the most important item on 
the one hand, and cotton on the other, we shall use these two terms as th 


se le a eae oP aay 
Se we ae a ee eee, A 


i 


‘ 


ae te $i ons sates POM ROE 


nel 


os sas ‘ “WILLIAM D. KELLEY. 


representatives of the two cee of products, ie respectively, to free 
labor and to slave labor. * * # 

The opposition to the protective tariff by the South arose from two causes, 
_ the first openly avowed at the time, and the second clearly deducible from the. 
- policy it pursued; the one to secure the foreign market for its cotton, the other 
_ to obtain a pountiful supply of provisions at cheap rates. * * * | 

The close proximity of the provision and cotton growing districts in the 
United States gave its planters.advantages over all other portions of the world. 
But they could not monopolize the markets, unless they could obtain a cheap 
supply of food and clothing for their negroes, and raise their cotton at such 
reduced prices as to undersell their rivals. * * * 

A manufacturing population, with its mechanical coadjutors, in the midst 
of the provision growers, on a scale such as the protective policy contemplated, 


- it was conceived, would create a permanent market for their products and en- 
hance the price, whereas if this manufacturing could be prevented and a sys- 
_tem of free trade adopted, the South would constitute the principal provision 

_ market of the country and the fertile lands of the North supply the cheap 


food demanded for its slaves). * * * 

‘The planters were led to believe that the millions of revenue collected off 
the goods imported was so much deducted from the value of the cotton that 
paid for them, either in the diminished price they received abroad or in the 
increased price which they paid for the imported ‘articles. To enhance the 
‘duties for the protection of our manufacturcrs, they were persuaded, would 


_ be so much of an additional tax upon themselves for the benefit of the North; 


and besides, to give the manufacturer such a monopoly of the home market 


for his fabrics would enable him to charge purchasers an excess over the true 
~ value of his stuffs to the whole amount of the duty. By the protective policy 


the planters expected to -have the cost of both provisions and clothing increased, 


and their ability to monopolize the foreign markets diminished in a correspond- — 
ing degree. If they could establish free trade, it would insure the American 

- market to foreign manufacturers, secure the foreign markets for their leading 

_ staples, repress home manufactures, force a large number of the Northern 
men into agriculture, multiply the growth and diminish thezprice of pro- 

_ visions, feed and clothe their slaves at lower rates, produce their cotton for a 


third or fourth of former prices, rival all other countries in its cultivation, and 
-monopolize the trade in the article throughout the whole of Europe. 

It was in vain that the friends of protection appealed to the fact that the 
duties levied on foreign goods did not necessarily enhance their cost to the 
consumer; that the competition among home manufacturers and between 


_ them and foreigners had greatly reduced the price of nearly every article 


“ah properly protected; that foreign manufacturers always had.and always would 


advance their prices according to our dependence upon them; that domestic 
competition was the only safety the country had against foreign imposition; 


that it was necessary we should become our own manufacturers, in a fair 


_ degree, to render ourselves independent of other nations in times of war, as 


sie sheng as to guard against the le cle in foreign legislation; that the South 


es ee See EIEN ies Soto is 
ait Stans ea te SEO fase ae te to ne Fe ee 
ei ee ne a ane are eg RIES 31 Seay eae fo ee retake. ae 


348 3 WILLIAM b RRLLHY 


would be vastly the gainer by having the market for its products at itsown 
doors, to avoid the cost of their transit across the Atlantic; that, in the event 
of the repression or want of proper ‘extension of our manufactures by the 
adoption of the free-trade system, the imports of foreign goods to meet the 


public wants would soon exceed the ability of the people to pay and inevitably 


involve the country in bankruptcy. But Southern politicians remained inflex- 
ible and refused to accept any policy except free trade, to the utter abandon- 


ment of the principle of protection. Whether they were jealous of the greater gs 


prosperity of-the North and desirous to cripple its*energies, or whether they 
were truly fearful of bankrupting the South, we shall not wait to inquire. : 
In a speech at the Waterborough dinner, given subsequently to the passage 
of the tariff of 1828, Mr. Hamilton, of South Carolina, gave expression to their 
resolve when he said, ‘‘ We must prevent the increase of manufactories, force _ 
the surplus labor into agriculture, promote the cultivation of our unimproved 
Western lands until provisions are so multiplied and reduced in price that the 
slave can be fed so cheaply as to enable us to grow our sugar at 3 cents a 
pound. Then, without protective duties, we can rival Cuba in the production — 
of that staple and drive her from our markets.”’ 


AS A LAW IT WOULD CLOSE COAL MINES, ORE BANKS, FACTORIES, AND 
ARREST THE DIVERSIFICATION OF AGRICULTURE. 


These few extracts, of which more than a hundred that are 


equally striking might be made, will suffice to show that this bill be- 2 
longs toa past age. That asa measure proposed for future guid- 


ance it is, as has been said, an anachronism, and is illustrative of 


systems of ethics and economic philosophy against which history a 


has written in blood decrees that are final and immutable. None of 
its provisions are in harmony with the spirit of the age: for they 


antagonize the aspirations of the American people and are not ) 


adapted to facilitate their efforts to supply their wants, gratify their 
desires, and provide for the future of their families. Its first effect, - 
should it be enacted into law, would be to arrest the magnificent de- 
velopment of mineral wealth, of manufacturing power, and of the 
diversification of agriculture now taking place throughout the ou 
and to paralyze the organized industries of the North. 


By putting wool on the free-list it would abolish sheep husbandry, ~ : 


destroy the immense capital embarked therein, and impoverish the 
more than a million men who own the flocks or are employed in their — 
care, and by working thisruinit would diminish the supply of cheap 


and healthful animal food now furnished by wool-growers to the ~ 2 
mining and manufacturing laborers of the country. It would also 


_ render the production of American tin-plates and cotton-ties ad “i 
sible by placing those articles on the free-list with wool. bey 


< < WILLIAM D. KELLEY. . B49 - 


~ By the transfer of these and other products of coal and iron ore 


_ to the free-list, and by reducing the duties on steel rails, structural 
iron, and many other forms of iron and steel sufficiently to with- 


draw protection from them and permit foreign producers to floods 


: our markets, it would, though it maintained existing duties on coal 


- thousands of laborers, not only in Northern States but in Maryland, 


and iron ore, close a majority of the bituminous coal fields and ore _ 


banks which are now giving profitable employment to hundreds of 


Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, and 


_ Alabama, and turn them adrift without prospect of other employ- 
- ment elsewhere than in cotton and corn fields. But while profess- 


ing to have abandoned their purpose to put coal and ore on the free- 


- list its framers have ingeniously contrived to make the importation 


_ of both free by such measures of indirection as may enable them to > 


attempt to saddle the Treasury Department or the judiciary with 
_ the political consequences of their deliberate tergiversations. 

No, the junto will not put coal and ore squarely and frankly on 
the free-list. They have, however, as effectually provided for the 


‘repeal of the duties that now protect them as could have been done 


by naming them in that list. Let us see whether I misrepresent the 


- effect of the scattered and disingenuous provisions of this bill, when 
' Isay that they make coal and ore free. That bituminous coal and 
- iron ore are covered by the phrase ‘‘mineral suostances in a crude 
state, and metals unwrought not especially enumerated and pro- 
vided for” can not be gainsaid. Coal is a mineral substance and iron 
_orea metal in a crude state and unwrought. If this be so, lines 130 


and 131 of the free-list embrace them as ‘‘ mineral substances in a crude 


= state and metals unwrought not specially enumerated and provided 


hil © ee 


- for.” Are coal and iron ore provided for in this bill? If they are I 


will be gratified to any member of the majority of the committee 
_ who will call my attention to the clause which enumerates and pro- 
vides for them. They are not specially enumerated or provided for, 


and consequently the repeal of the existing duties on these articles 


_is specifically provided for in lines 2 and 3 of section 41, the last 
paragraph of the bill, the language of which is that “‘all laws and 
parts of laws in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.” This lan- 


ee 


guage applies to and repeals the provisions of law which now 


- authorize the collection of duties on those ‘‘ mineral substances in a 


crude state and metals unwrought” known to commerce as bitumi- 
nous coal and iron ore. 


et, Te 
Se Se Mere > 


Faas aes 


we NaS Dice MOM See Tee Ne WALT) Sate Cea ea ie 


VAP So oe ee ee 


SRO Pe WETITAM REL AT 


& 


JUTE AND RAMIE CULTURE IS ADAPTED TO THE GULF STATES. —~ 


; 


But these remarks apply to mining and manufacturing enter- 
prises, and it is natural that representatives of States in which man- — 
ufactures are almost unknown, and but few of the vast mineral ~ 


deposits of which have been opened, should regard with indiffer- 
ence or hostility the capital, skill, and labor embarked in such en- 
terprises. But as it is now nearly a quarter of a century since the 
war closed, it would not seem to be a violent presumption to assume 
that representative men from the cotton-growing States, the value 


of whose mineral deposits and water power was till recently un- 


known or ignored, would endeavor to enhance the value of their 
farms by diversifying the agricultural productions of their section. 
But no evidence of willingness to permit the diversification even of 
Southern agriculture is disclosed by the provisions of this bill. On 
the contrary, it selects the farming industries of the country, 


North and South, as special objects of destruction. As the constant 


production of cotton impoverished the people of the South by ex- 
hausting the fertility of its alluvial fields, so, as our farmers are 
learning by painful experience, is the constant production of wheat 


and corn in the Western States and Territories exhausting the pro- — 


ductive power of that region. 


In proof of the necessity for a wider diversification of our agri- 


culture I may point to the fact that while the average production — 


per acre of wheat and corn diminishes the price also falls off. This — 
is shown by the following statement from the Agricultural Depart- 


ment of the number of acres under wheat and corn, the total crop 
of each, and the average price per bushel throughout the year for 
the decade including 1878 and 1887: 


Corn. Wheat. 
Years. Price Price 
Acres. Bushels. per Acres. Bushels. per 
bushel. bushel, 
ibn igo eae anna 51,585,000 1,388,218,750 | $0.31.8 32,108,560 420,122,400 Werke 
ELL ee ae 53,085,450 1,547,901 790 .87.5+] 32,545,950 448,756,630 yy 108 
1880. sors iS. 62,317,842 1,717 434,548 .389.6—| 37,986,717 498,549, 868 .95.1 
1881s cet) 64,262,025 1,194,916,000 .63.6—| 37,709,020 383,280,090 ae ied 
TB82 eee 65,659,546 1.617,025, 100 .48.4+| 37,067,194 504,185,470 -88.2 
1 boleys eesti 68,301,889 1,551,066,895 .42.0 36,455 593 421,086,160 .91.0 
18845 oo.208. 69,683,780 1,'795,528,000 385.7 39,475,885 512,765,000 64.5 
ASBOLe Stel 73,130,150 1,936,176,000 82.8 34,189,246 357,112,000 cP ict 
LS80 0 ae ss 75,694,208 1,665,441,000 386.6 36,806,184 457,218,000 68.7 © 
BOOK cet cote 72,892,720 1,456,161,000 .44.4 37,641,783 456,329,000 .68.1 


These figures show that the increase of acreage in corn was more 


than 40 per cent. during the decade: the increase of the yield was 


re 
2 
oa 


less than 5 per cent., and in wheat the increase in acreage was 17 


WILLIAM D. KELLEY. 351 


per cent., but in cropsonly 8 per cent. But the fact is patent that 
there is no department of American industry in which greater 

diversification is so imperatively demanded as in agriculture. Nor, 
except when Whitney’s cotton-gin gave the South a monopoly of 


cotton-culture, has there been a time when the introduction of new 
plants and the adoption of new sources of supply and new methods 


of manufacture promised such profits to our farmers as do the 
domestication of jute and ramie in the Gulf States, and of sugar 


from cane in Florida or from sorghum, beets, or corn in all parts of 
our country at this time. The enormous rewards which follow the 


cultivation of jute and ramie are but faintly intimated in the fol- 
lowing extract from a recent oper letter from my friend, Professor 


Waterhouse, of Florida and Washington University, St. Louis, Mo., 


from whom I parted in San Francisco in 1870, when he left our 
country to visit the jute and ramie fields of India and China. 


The new tariff bill proposes the abolition of the imposts on foreign jute 
and ramie. There are weighty reasons which plead for Se exemption of these 
fibers from the list of free imports. 

Jute is one of the most important productions of India. The variety of its 


- uses is almost illimitable. The range of manufactures from this textile ex- 
tends from coarse matting and cotton-baling to fine imitations of linen and 
silk. The growing needs of mankind are steadily increasing the demand for 
this fiber. Jute is annual ly enriching India with a productive wealth of scores 
of millions. 


Ramie is the strongest fiber in the world. Narrower than jute in the 


‘range of its applied uses, it is superior in its suitability for finer fabrics. Barely 


inferior to silk in beauty of luster, it surpasses its glossy rival in durability. 


It is woven into textures of practical utility and elegant luxury. It is wrought 
into cordage of extraordinary strength, laces of filmy delicacy, and plushes of 


exquisite beauty. The demand for this valuable fiber far exceeds the supply. 

~ The luxuriant growth of jute and ramie in the Gulf States shows that the 
conditions of soil and climate are suited to their culture. Numerous experi- 
ments, continued through a succession of years, justify the assurance of 


_ Southern farmers that ‘‘ these plants can be cultivated almost as easily as In- 


dian corn.” The success of repeated trials has dispelled every intelligent 
doubt that the soil of the South is adapted to the growth of these textiles. 
A diversification of industries is essential to the highest welfare of the coun- 


try. The Southern States have long been impoverished by an unwise devotion 


to the cultivation of a single staple. There ‘is no truer economic maxim than 


that variety of employment is a productive factor of national wealth. The 


culture of jute and ramie meets an imperative requirement. The tillage of 


_ these plants would not only richly diversify Southern agriculture, but would 
- employ labor at seasons when cotton needs least attention, and would bring 


352 WILLIAM D. KELLEY. 


returns at times when the income from cotton is not available. Industries 

opening such copious sources of public wealth, and so happily supplying the — 

wants of both labor and capital, are worthy of legislative encouragement. . 
* * * * * * * * % 


tt ce teed) pitta he: a 


Under circumstances whieh seemingly assure the prosperity of the new 
culture, is it wise for Congress to make the proposed change? The aboli- 
tion of duties on rival imports would benefit only a comparatively small - 


edd 8 ate: ¥ 
a.) =.= 4 haw» 


‘number of people, but the successful growth of jute and ramie in the South 


would add large and richly productive resources to the wealth of the nation. — 
In their crude and manufactured forms jute and ramie are yielding India and ~ 
China an annual revenue of not less than $150,000,000; but Texas alone can — 
raise more jute and ramie than India and China have ever yet produced. Un- — 
der the patronage of wise laws, with the greater productiveness of intelli-— 
gent agriculture, and with the economies of efficient machinery, the South 
ought at an early day to derive from the tillage of these staples as large anes 
income as India and China now do. 


These statements, coming from as careful an investigator and con- 
servative thinker as Professor Waterhouse, convince me that the cul- 
tivation and manufacture of jute and ramie would increase the price 
of land throughout the Gulf States, and bring to the people thereof — 
more than one hundred millions of dollars annually as the market — 
value of an average crop; and that the location in their midst of ~ 
factories which would soon rival those of Calcutta and Dundee would — 
more than double this annual income. And I say without reserva- — 
tion to the enterprising men who are shaping the destinies of and as- _ 
suring prosperity and wealth to the New South that it will need only 
the announcement that our fields furnish jute and ramie as well as © 
cotton to bring Northern and foreign capital to their midst to share — 
the enormous profits of the manufacture of the newly-domesticated 
fibers into thread and fabrics. Addressing this class of my fellow- — 
citizens, I also invite attention to the fact that it is the representa- — 
tive voice of Texas, Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, and 
West Virginia that proposes not only to repel the introduction of 
jute and ramie, but to render unprofitable the growth of flax, hemp, 
manila, and other substitutes for hemp, jute, ramie, and other fibers _ 
by huddling them together on the free-list. Some of them will 
probably doubt my statement; but it is an absolute truth, however 
incoxprehensible it may seem to be. “a 

IT could understand the policy of the authors of the bill in the -- 
South still needed cheap provisions for its slaves as it did when cot- — 
ton was king; but now that many of its native citizens and allthe — 
land-owning immigrants from the North and foreign countries who 3 
are taking part in the reconstruction of its fortunes are raising their a 


/ 
é 


iy 


i. ae ae oe Ri RAR rah sia Pt rat LR ey PAW EE Oe ee ei Orratiyre } Mh at A Ree oe 
EE WAS wea ee ips : ie: i ‘ ‘ 


WILLIAM D. KELLEY, 358 


own cereals, growing the grasses which give profits to dairies, and 


have really converted many portions of the South into agricultural 
districts, this resistance to diversification of Southern crops by 


_ Southern representatives is, at least to my mind, inexplicable. 
‘Should gentlemen desire to learn more of the value of jute and ramie 


as crops, and of the capacity of the Gulf States to produce them 
profitably, and of the extent and marvelous growth of their manu- 
facture in India and Scotland, they will find a fund of information 
in the special report of the Department of Agriculture of 1883 on Jute 
Culture and the importance of the industry, which was prepared 
by Professor Waterhouse with the caution as to its statements of the 
values and amount of products which characterizes all the produc- 
tions of its author. 


THE WORLD OWES THE ABUNDANT SUPPLY AND LOW PRICE OF SUGAR 
TO THE PROTECTIVE POLICY. 


- The world is indebted to the fostering care of government tor the 
bountiful supply of sugar which enables the humblest of our labor- 


ing classes to include it in the list of their daily necessities. 


President Cleveland’s free-trade message, by its assumption that 
the duty is always added to the cost, not only of imported commodi- 


ties, but to the price of like commodities produced in this country, 


shows how profoundly ignorant he is of economic science. To illus- 
urate the puerile absurdity of this assumption I invite the President’s 


attention to the fact that though the duties imposed by our Govern- 


ment on sugar when reduced to ad valorem standards were never so 


ea: high as they now are, the price of sugar was never so low in this 


country as it nowis. This condition of things is not exceptional, 


- but is consistent with the history of the production of saccharine 


plants and the conversion of their juices into marketable sugar. 
_ About the time of the birth of Napoleon Bonaparte French acade- 


- micians who were distinguished as chemists had demonstrated the 


fact that sugar could be produced from beets; but while they put 
this fact beyond the region of doubt they were unable to produce 
beet sugar in quantity, and at a cost that would make it marketable. 
The discovery was a noteworthy fact that was not lost sight of by 


_the academy or the practical chemists of France, and when the allied 
_ powers sought to destroy the commerce of France by blockades, or- 
ders in council, and other devices they succeeded in putting the price 


eof sugar in Paris up to more than 5francsper pound. Though sugar 


__-was a necessity to France she could not purchase it at that price. 


Bonaparte was a disciple of Colbert, the founder of the textile and 


_ Geramic industries of modern France, and he met the allies, as the 


354 g WILLIAM D. KELLEY. 


great economist would have done, by proclaiming his determination 


to establish the independence of France in the matter of sugar and 
molasses by applying the resources of the empire to their produc- 
tion from other sources than cane. 

Bringing to his counsels the most eminent chemists and mecha- 
nicians of France, he evolved two systems of bounties by which he 
hoped to establish new and profitable industries throughout France, 
and secure a cheap supply of home-grown sugar for her people. He 


offered bounties, beginning with 100,000 francs, to him who should 


produce the greatest weight of sugar beets from a given number of © 


-acres, and descending by gradual scales to small sums to the farmer 
who should raise the most from a single acre, and 100,000 francs to 
the chemist who should extract the greatest amountjof sugar-yielding 
juice from a given weight of beets. These stimulants with the inor- 
dinate prices demanded for cane sugar exalted the question of the 
production of beet-root sugar into a national enthusiasm; and little 
more than two years were required to add it to the commercial com- 
. modities of{france. Napoleon’s genius guided the organization of the 
( ,ndustry, and gave it instant popularity among the French people 

by rejecting the system which prevailed in the slave regions from 


which cane sugar had been procured. In place of immense planta- — 


tions and costly factories in which cane sugar was produced he pro- 
posed small central factories in agricultural districts in which every 
farmer by devoting a portion of his land to beets might share the 
bounties the government was bestowing, and hasten the production 
of such supplies of sugar as would meet the demands of France and 
her people. 

In view of the magical success of Napoleon’s plan, Germany has- 
tened to adopt it, and to establish her system of bounties and central 
factories. So great and immediate was the success of this new in- 
dustry that in a few years the taxes imposed on beet sugar began to 
refund the bounties which had called it into existence. But though 


-. France and Germany have each found in the industry a prolific 


~ gource of revenue, they have both maintained a system of bounties 
upon the sugar produced by their people, and shipped to foreign 
countries from their respective ports. 


In view of these facts, who can deny that protection has aug- 


mented the supply and diminished the price of sugar? Yet this bill 
proposes a reduction of 20 per cent. on the duties now assessed on all 
grades of sugar above No, 13, Dutch standard, | 


Ce Se Ra ne PT. cl) eer AE ie pA er Aer ORY Yk WAI Te | AIGAM tsi, Coe 
Pree ae ; % Bi lcs SO ey : barat 
¥ 5 : t : 


" 


er WILLIAM D. KELLEY. 855 


THE EXTENT OF OUR SUGAR-BEARING TERRITORY. 


The United States have more square miles of sugar-producing ter- 
ritory than any four other nations, and now when millions of dollars 


~ are being applied to the development of these lands shall Congress. — 
restrict the production of sugar by reducing duties under the foster- 


ing influence of which these important and costly enterprises have 


been entered upon? Let us glance at the extent of our sugar terri- 


tory and the manifold sources from which we may produce the com- 
modity. To assume that we are dependent upon Louisiana alone 
for our supply of native sugar would be a great mistake; yet when 
we remember that when the war closed the plantations of Louisiana 
were overgrown, her sugar-houses in ruins, and the costly but 
neglected machinery they had housed was fit only for scrap heaps, 
I may cite the progress of sugar-making in Louisiana since 1867 as 
an illustration of the vitalizing influence of protective duties. In 
spite of the steady decline in the price of foreign sugar, the poverty 


_. of her people, and the demoralization of her plantations, Louisiana, 


encouraged by protective duties, has added materially to the world’s 


supply.of cane sugar. But our sources of supply include the beet, 


corn, and sorghum, the last of which may be successfully grown 
wherever corn will mature. 

_ I would plead for the maintenance of the present duties on sugar 
were cane our only source of supply, for it is predicted by Cuban 
and other insular experts who are skilled in the production of cane 
and the manufacture of sugar therefrom, that the great North 
American cane-field will will be found in Central and Southern Flor- 


ida. In this belief, capital, skill, and enterprise are flowing into that 

State to utilize the reclaimed ‘‘ swamp and overflowed lands,” which 
~ are said to be equal to the best sugar lands of Cuba. There, too, 
_ climatic advantages are very great, and give cane from six weeks to 
_ two months more time in which to ripen than it enjoys in Louisiana. 


This greater duration of the season is said to add an average of 20 
per cent. to the saccharine strength of the crop. 

A company of Northern capitalists having planted large fields of 
sugar near the new town of Runnymede, in the Kissimmee Valley, 
are investing a million dollars in buildings, machinery, and general 
agricultural and manufacturing facilities. Of the possibilities of 
Florida as a producer of cane sugar Ican speak from personal obser- 
vation and extended inquiry while traversing the State; but of the 


e. reputed sugar fields of Texas I speak from report from trusted 
_ sources when I say that there is a large region of land in that State 
hie which is fitted by the character of its soil and by a longer and more 


es 
Rit 


~—s 


ee 


356 WILLIAM D. KELLEY. 


genial growing season than that of Louisiana, which may be applied 
to the growth of sugar without interfering with the vast area which 
Professor Waterhouse assures us is adapted to the production of jute 
and ramie. Had we no other sugar lands than those of Texas, Flor: 
ida, Louisiana, and other Gulf States, I should regard it as unwise 


-and unpatriotic to reduce the duty on sugar at a time when science 


has just furnished cheaper and more effective methods of extracting — 
the juice from cane, beets, and sorghum; and the emancivation of- 
Florida from the legal embarrassments which for nearly fifty years 
prevented her from making title to any portion of her land, and 
thus repelled settlement and improvement, has enabled her to open 
her fertile fields to energetic and patriotic men who will under the pro- ~ 
tection of existing duties strive to save to their country the $100,000,- — 
000 per year which we now pay Cuban slave owners for sugar, while 
abolishing a source which is this year contributing about $60,000,000 
to the embarrassing Treasury surplus. : 


CORN SUGAR, 


Let us turn from the consideration of cane sugar and glance 
hastily at our other sources of supply. As.an element of the total 
supply of sugar the manufacture of glucose or corn sugar does not 


- constitute an important element; but in view of the diminishing 


yield of corn per acre on lands on which it is a constant annual 
crop, and the decline in price, notwithstanding the diminished yield 
per acre, this industry is worthy of consideration by our farmers. 
The glucose factories in the States of New York, Ohio, Illinois, Iowa, 
Missouri, and Kansas employ an invested capital of $11,000,000, with — 
an annual capacity for the consumption of more than 19,000,000 
bushels of corn. Estimating the average crop per acre at 26 bushels, 
732,000 acres are required to furnish the present annual supply; 
and estimating the number of men required to raise corn at 3 to 100 
acres, this industry employs 21,950 farmers, and 4,575 laborers in 
factories, at an average rate of daily wages of $1.50, and the value 
of their annual production of glucose is $17,128,000. 

It is claimed for the committee’s bill that it will open foreign 
markets to our productions, and in connection with this preposter- 
ous claim it may not be inappropriate to say that the corn consumed 
in this one industry, of which little is known to the farmers of the — 
country at large, equals more than one-third of our total annual 


export of corn, and is about one-half the quantity consumed by our 


distilleries, whose interests are protected by the existing tariff and 


_ by the monopoly created and vested in the ‘‘ whisky trust” by the — 


internal taxes on distilled spirits, both of which methods of protec- — 


oa Se ie a j 


pedis. 


tion the majority of the Committee on Ways and Means seem to 3 


regard as vested rights of the “trust” which no legislation may 


_ repeal or modify. 


BEET-ROOT SUGAR. 


Let us now pass from the contemplation of a puny infant to the 
expanding proportions of one of the world’s industrial giants that is 
seeking domestication in our country. The production of sugar 
from beets in Europe is six times as great as that of Cuba from cane, 
and that we can produce as much as Europe does is no longer a sub- 
ject of doubt. The beet-sugar factory of Alvarado, Cal., made a 
success of the industry in 1879, and has pursued it with profit every 
year since then, and if the statements of Professor Hiigard, of the 
University of California, who is an accredited authority, may be 
accepted, there are at least 5,830 square miles of land in that State 


suitable for the profitable growth of sugar beets. Here, then, is a 


field from which the entire amount of sugar and molasses now con- 
sumed in this country may be produced. The ablest man connected 
with the production of sugar and the world’s commerce in that 


- commodity is probably Claus Spreckels, of San Francisco. He is a 


credible witness, and when recently examined by a Congressional 


committee on this subject he testified as to the availability of great 


stretches of land in Alameda and contiguous counties from which 


he says more saccharine matter can be obtained per acre through | 


beet culture than has yet been done anywhere on the continent of 


Europe. He was brought before the committee to be examined as 


to his knowledge of the ‘‘sugar trust” and as to whether he was 


~ connected therewith. 


But the course of the investigation led him to say to the commit- 
tee that he had no doubt that if the existing duties on sugar and 
molasses should be retained this country would, in eight years from 
the time at which he spoke, produce its entire supply of both these 
commodities. As an acquaintance of some years’ standing, Mr. 


_ Spreckels favored me with a most instructive interview at my cham- 
bers on the evening following a casual meeting with him in the room 


of the Committee on Ways and Means. His statements were full of 
instruction, and his faith in their accuracy is demonstrated by the 
large expenditures of money and labor he is making to carry his 


~ gonvictions into effect. 


When Mr. Spreckels determined to establish beet farms and a 


sugar factory at Watsonville, Cal., he departed for Europe, taking 
with him his son and a draughtsman and an engineer in whose attain- 


ments and judgment he has the most implicit confidence. With 


4 
Misr 


"WILLIAM D. KELLEY. 857, 


a 
3 
ee 
aa 
Pea: 
eee, 
wy 


re SHR Ctl Ooi ee ea ae be eS Rtas rug yf SE ae a ee Gals | ne pee Ee Nee Gee A Psa ae oak Oe MOR mS 
AGA ones ah pies, be Hagler ap ‘ . ee 


358 “WILLIAM D. KELLEY. 


these companions he explored the sugar regions of France and Ger- 
many, and studied the machinery he found in use in all the great 
works, together with the methods pursued in the culture of beets, 
and the machinery best adapted to the new processes of extracting 
juice from sugar-bearing plants. Having concluded his observations 


he contracted for machinery of sufficient capacity to exhaust 700 


tons of beets-in twenty-four hours. Leaving his engineer behind 
him he hastened home to erect a building capable of housing one- 
half the machinery, by the use of which he will consume 350 tons of 
_ beets to the twenty-four hours and produce 5,000 tons of sugar dur- 
ing the present season. While this work in field and factory is 
proceeding he will construct the other half of the building to 
house the remainder of the machinery contracted for, which will in- 
crease the capacity of the factory to 700 tons of beets to the twenty- 
four hours and the production of sugar to 10,000 tons per annum. 
This plant he proposes to enlarge annually until its product shall 
reach 40,000 tons per annum. Though but a private citizen, Mr. 
Spreckels has adopted the Napoleonic methods of conferring a last- 
ing blessing upon his adopted country. 

He has imported 25 tons of beet seed, which, having been care- ~ 
fully selected, cost about 15 cents a pound, which he has distributed 
- gratuitously among farmers in, the vicinity, in accordance with the 
number of acres they will plant, while the question of success is open 
to doubt in their minds. He has made contracts at satisfactory 
. prices with one hundred and sixty-three farmers for all the beets 
they will produce, and to stimulate their efforts has offered two sys- 
tems of premiums which, though not imperial as were those of Bona- 
parte, are sufficient to induce the beet-growers who have contracts 
with him to exercise good husbandry. To the one who having planted 
but 5 acres and produces best results of his class he will give a pre-— 
mium of $150; to the producer of the best results from 10 acres the 
_ premium will be $250: and for the best results from more than 10 

acres it will be $500. Twelve per cent. is agreed upon by the con- 
tracting parties as a fair standard of average saccharine strength. To — 
those farmers whose beets yield more than 12 per cent. and not more 
than 13 per cent. he adds a half dollar per ton to the price of the en- 
tire crop; and to those whose beets yield more than 13 per cent. an 
additional half-dollar, making an increase of $1 a ton upon their en. 
tire crop. 

Claus Spreckels knows what he is about. He believes that the 
way to fight the ‘* Trust ” is to locate beet fields and sugar factories 
in all parts of the country, and to defy the conspirators against the 
public weal by the immensity of the product and the saving of the 


Te a ee ae 
i ‘ os 
om " 


Gio Rope g wes Bias Leis ad ae 98 BEI Shean a oe Oe tm ean bie cmd Al) hie 


cost of transportation by bringing the producer and consumer toeach 
other’s side. Mr. Spreckels insists upon it that in the hands of prop- 
erly instructed farmers and with competent machinery in the fac- 


tories beets may be grown and manufactured as profitably in Ohio, © 
. Llinois, and other central States as in Germany or California, 


SORGHUM SUGAR. 


But cane, beets, and corn are not the only plants from which we 
may extract sugar profitably and in quantities adequate to supply 
the demands of our home market. Agricultural skill and commercial 
enterprise have given us many and rich varieties of the sorghum 
plant, the value of which, under the influence of improved cultivation, 
recently invented machinery, and the discovery of the distributive 
process of extracting its juice, have assured its position with tropical 
cane and the beet as a source of saccharine supply. The profitable 


manufacture of sorghum requires the erection of factories within a 


radius of 6 miles from the fields upon which the plant is grown, At 
these factories farmers will find a cash market for their stripped cane 


at prices proportioned to its saccharine strength and purity. There 


are among the intelligent farmers of Kansas many who, having 
watched with interest the Government experiments at Fort Scott, 
are convinced beyond all peradventure that if the existing duties on 
sugar be maintained Kansas alone can supply the American demand 
for sugar from her sorghum fields, Nor do I believe that this 
claim is exaggerated. 

That sorghum will mature wherever corn may be grown is a fact 
of general notoriety, and Kansas has 30,000 square miles of what may 
safely be regarded as good corn land. But though the recent experi- 
ments of the Government and those made by the Kansas State board 
of agriculture during 1887 have exhibited results that will give 
her a leading position among the Northern sugar States, a num- 


ber of her sister States will bo neither long nor far behind her in 
availing themselves of she profits which follow the substitution of 


sorghum for corn. 

Mr. Cowgill, who in behalf of the State board inspected the manu- 
facture cf sugar in Kansas during 1887, says in his report— 

That the sorghum yields to the farmer more than twice as much per acre 
as either of the leading cereals, .nd asa gross product of agriculture and manu- 


_ facture on our own soil more than six times as much per acre as is usually re- ss 
se) 
alized from cither of these standard crops. 


And Professor Swenson, who conducted the experiments of the 
Agricultural Department at Fort Scott, thus sums up his report to — 


the Commissioner: 


iy Se tei en AS 


Rat NIP ar ee 
Mea tee 


360 ——~*«CWLLTAME D. CMLL. 


St weg ea aH Ft os = ~ 


In reviewing the work the most important: point suggested is the complete 


success of the experiments in demonstrating the commercial practicability of 
manufacturing sugar from sorghum-cane. 

2. That sugar was produced uniformly throughout the entire season. 

3. That this was not due to any extraordinary content of sugar in the cane, 
but, on the contrary, the cane was much injured by severe drought and chinch- 
bugs. 

4, That the value of the sugar and molasses obtained this year per ton of 
sorghum-cane will compare favorably with the highest yields obtained in 
Louisiana from sugar-cane, and taking into consideration the much greater 
cost of the sugar-cane and that it has no equivalent to the 2 bushels of seed 
yielded per ton of sorghum-cane, also our much cheaper fuel, I say with- 
out hesitancy that sugar can be produced fully as cheaply in Kansas as in 
Louisiana. 


But if sorghum offers such ptiafita to the Northern farmers, what 
may not those of Southern Texas and Florida derive from this plant 


PSS! eee ee ee es , ‘ VS eee 


and its manufacture? In each of these States two crops may be 


grown and manufactured in a year. To peril the domestication of 


- the sorghum industry by a modification of the duties on sugar or any 


other manifestation of indifference to its benefits would be a crime 
against the farmers of every section of the country. 


An incalculable element of the value of the beet and norte in- 


dustry to the farmer is found in the fact that both serve to regenerate 
fields the fertility of which has been impaired by the too constant 
growth of wheat or corn. The exhausted lands of Germany and 
France have been reinvigorated by beet culture and the manufacture 
of sugar. And I fail to see how Congress could inflict so fatal a 
stroke on the interests of farmers and the industrial classes gener- 
ally as by declaring the culture of sugar an outlaw in the United 
States by reducing duties upon it and molasses below an assuredly 


__ protective rate. 


THE SURPLUS. 


But the authors of this bill and the professional advocates of free — 


foreign trade will assume from the drift of these remarks that I re- 
sist the reduction of the surplus, and am unwilling to abolish the 
taxes from which it flows in annually increasing volume. 

I reply to such suggestions in the language of a resolution which 


= Isuomitted to the House of Representatives more than seventeen 


years ago, on the 12th of December, 1870, and which was adopted with 
but six dissenting votes. It expressed the almost unanimous senti- 
ment of the people, which had not then been corrupted by the in- 
fluence of the ‘‘whisky ring ” as it has been during the intervening 
years, 


Ss the question of the surplus and the sources whence it flows as to in- | 


-_ 


It was as follows: 


Resolved, That the true principle of revenue reform points to the abolition 


~ of the internal-revenue system, which was created as a war measure to pro- . 
‘vide for extraordinary expenses, the continuance of which involves the em- 


ployment, atthe cost of millions of dollars annually, of an army of assessors, 
collectors, supervisors, detectives, and other officers previously unknown, and 


- requires the repeal at the earliest day consistent with the maintenance of the 


faith and credit of Government of all stamp.and other internal taxes. 


In accordance with the precepts of Colbert, and the example of 
his illustrious disciple, Napoleon Bonaparte, I would so legislate on 


crease the wealth, power, and dignity of the country by promoting 
the development of its natural resources and the diversification of 
its industries, and thus diminish its dependence upon foreign im- 


portations upon which duties are collected. I would derive the 


national revenues from customs duties so adjusted to remunerative 


prices for commodities as to stimulate and defend home productions, 
while preventing combinations, trusts, and monopolies of any kind. 
- from plundering consumers by demanding fictitious prices. In pur- 


suance of this policy I would promote by adequate duties the growth 
of jute, ramie, flax, hemp, and other fibrous piants, and their manu- 
facture into thread, cordage, and fabrics; and would maintain ex- 
isting duties on sugar. 

I would also impose such duties on tin-plates a would quicken 


_ the mining of tin and invite the location of such smelting works, 
furnaces, forges, and rolling-mills for plate and sheets in close prox- 


imity to the mines as.would crown the Black Hills of Dakota with in- 
dustries of which the nation would be proud, and the beneficence of 
which all its people would soon feel and appreciate. 

_ But these processes of reducing the revenue, though certain, will 


: be gradual; and, as the President has truly said, ‘‘it is a condition 


which ppateonha us—not a theory,” the neduction should be effected 
immediately by the abolition of sources of income the receipts from 
whichmay*be computed month by month if not absolutely day by day. 
This is not only practicable but is demanded by the true principle of 
revenue reform which points now, in April, 1888, as it did on the 


12th of December, 1870, | “to the ners of ‘ha internal-revenue 


system.” 


The politics of this country are now dominated by the whisky — 
trust as absolutely as they were by slavery before the war, and King — 


Aleohol is proving that he is as hostile to national development as 


_ King Cotton ever was, 


TR: CER Loe GT oe pinta Se hae en Saad. 2 eee oe BR, 
gs ’ x SSE: , 


SWIM D. KRLERE OO 


Re Beet ee WILLIAM D. ‘KELLEY. 


Having devoted the years of my ipercue manhood to the over. 


throw of the political influence of the slave oligarchy, I intend tode- — 


vote my declining years to the emancipation of its political affairs, 
from the fatal embrace of the subjects of most fruitful source of 
poverty, ignorance, vice, crime, disease, insanity, and ignominious 
death known to the twileationlof the nineteenth century, and whose 
subtle and insidious power is arrayed alike against the mining and 
manufacturing interests of the country and the diversification of its 
agriculture. 

Let me in support of this indictment glance briefly at the wrongs 
of the most illustrious victim of the ‘‘ whisky trust,” which Con- 
- gress, by provisions of its laws for the regulation and collection of 
taxes on distilled spirits, has invested with royal prerogatives. 
Kentucky is the richest in natural resources, and is in geographical 
position and other respects the most favored of the United States 
east of the Mississippi. If any one of the sisterhood of American 
States may with propriety be spoken of as the Empire State it is 
Kentucky. Considered in the light of her geographical position, and 
her possible means of transit and traffic with and through cotermi- 
nous States, she appears rather as an empire composed of several 
States than as a single State. 

Her territory is contiguous to seven States, the population of 
which numbered in 1880 more than 14,000,000, which together in- 
cluded 307,925 square miles, and were intersected at the close of last 
year by 33,555 miles of railroad over which her travel and traffic 


might be connected with and enjoy the benefits of our entire system 
of local and transcontinental lines. Her area is 41,283 square miles. 


Her population in 1880 numbered 1,648,690, and in 1887 there were 
2,070 miles of railroad operated within her limits. Her rivers are 
said to exceed in number, navigable length, and supply of water- 
power those of any other State, and the waters of the Ohio and Mis- 
sissippi bathe her northern and western borders. The extent and 
variety of her mineral resources have not been ascertained by even a 
preliminary geological reconnaisance, and the fact that her agricultu- 
ral resources have not been ascertained experimentally is attested by 
the magnificence and density of her majestic forests. The soil and 
climate of Central Kentucky, which in passing I may say is the seaé 
of amore refined and cultivated pastoral community than I have 


ever been introduced te elsewhere, unless it was in the southern ~ 


counties of England, are specially adapted to the growth of hemp, 
flax, and other fibrous plants, to nutritious grasses, including the 
world-famed blue-grass, and to all the cereals known to American 


= ‘“ rae mt ie ee r 
) * "re 


ht 
ee 


agriculture, That the soil and native growths of this region of the 


ote aS a ae) a eee TE tae <F y 
ae i J “re: ~ ne y ys & J, ze ‘ yin, Rad 
Va ‘ > @ 


State Moatabute: in an exceptional degree to the physical development 
of the human race and that of domestic animals is attested by the 


The coal fields of Kentucky exceed in extent and richness those 


of England as they came from nature. She has two, the western 


and eastern. The former comprises about 4,000 square miles, and 
lies less than 100 miles southwest of Louisville; the latter, the east- 


ern field, comprises more than 10,000 square miles, and extends from 


the Ohio River to the Tennessee line. Much of the coal of this field 
is cannel coal, of so high a grade that taking the pronunciation of its 
name from the illuminating power it discloses while consuming in 
the grate or on the hearth, many of the people call it ‘‘ candle coal;” 
but with this priceless treasure are also vast deposits of the finest 
quality of coking coal, with reference to which Mr. John R. Proctor, 


- thecapable and energetic director of the geological survey now being 
- made by order of the State, says: 


1. That the largest known area of coking coal in the United States is in 


Southeastern Kentucky. 


2. That the coal is very thick, of uniform good quality, and as favorably 
situated for cheap mining as any coal. 
3. That it is the nearest coking coal to. the center of population of the 


United States. 
4, That it is nearer to extensive deposits of high-grade Bessemer-steel ores 


than is any other coking coal. 


5. That it is near to extensive deposits of cheap iron ore. 
6. That there are other valuable coals in this region, including large deposits 


- of superior cannel coal. 


He also says: 
Since the first publication by the survey regarding the finding of this coking 


coal, made in 1882, the coal has been identified and traced over a wide area, 
and many tests have been made proving its superior quality as a coking coal. 


Her almost unequalled combination of [geographical advantages, 
agricultural capabilities, mineral and other native material for 
manufacture entitle Kentucky to a leading position among the 
progressive States of the Union; yet itisa melancholy truth that to 
speak of her as a leading State, a progressive State, or even as a 
prosperous State, would be to indulge in bitter irony. 


WILLIAM Do RELEEY, (20 ee 368 


grand and harmonious development of its men and women, as well 
as by the almost unchallenged superiority of its highly-bred flocks, 
_and herds, and studs of horses, which are the pride of the State. 


In the midst of almost unparalleled wealth and general physical _ oa 


advantages the mass of her people are steeped in poverty and 


illiteracy, and are strangers not only to the comforts of humble life 


but to the commonest and most absolute daily necessaries of Northern. — 


“WILLIAM D. EBLLBY. eae. 


laborers. As appears from the Census of 1880, 29.9 per cent. of her 
~ people who were ten years of age and peat were unable to write, 
as the following figures show. Those of this age numbered 1.163,498, 
of whom 258,186 were unable to read and 348,392 were unable to ei 
write. “ga 
In Rowan Sonne the mineral resources of which are almost 
incalculable, families, in default of any legitimate employment for 
their time, hand down from generation to generation feuds of such 
deadly character that enterprising men fear to traverse the region ~ 
even to examine personally the vast wealth of the territory occupied — 
by these semi-barbarians. Indeed, intelligent people throughout the 
country who have not given special study to the early history of 
Kentucky ascribe the origin of the phrase ‘‘The dark and bloody 
ground ” to these feuds in which so many lives are taken, the takers 
of which notoriously defy arrest and legal punishment, rather than 
to the perils that attended the early settlers of the State, when the 
. location of each new homestead was determined by the existence of 
a spring from which water might be procured without too great 
exposure of the settler or one of his family to the murderous Indians 
into whose midst they were carrying civilization. 
: Having been honored by invitations from the Board of Trade and 
_ the Commercial Club of Louisville to attend the sittings of a com- 
- mercial and industrial conference of representative business men 
from every part of the State, and to address the conference, I reached 
Louisville in the afternoon of the 4th of October, the day on which ~ 
the conference assembled. In the evening, while I was yet a stranger 
in the city, I strolled into the hall and sat where my presence was 
not likely to attract the attention of persons who might chance to _ 
- know me, and was an interested listener to the report of a committee 
of the Commercial Club to whom had been assigned the duty of | 
interrogating well-known citizens of the several counties of the State 
on the prevalent opinion of the county as to the propriety of inviting 
immigration, the kind of immigrants that were most desired, if any 
were deemed desirable, together with a statement of the leading 
products of the country, the price at which land could be purchased, 
and specially whether farms were for sale, and the price per acre at 
_ which they were held. 
: From this report and inquiries it ehanled me to institute I learned 
that the maxim ‘‘ Kentucky for Kentuckians” had been so rigidly 
_ Maintained that there were many counties of the State in which a 
~ person of foreign birth or one familiar with a foreign language could — 
_ not be found; that so extreme was the poverty of a majority of the — 
_ people of about one-half of the counties of the State that they were — 


Be ee WILLIAM yy REELay Be 


unable to defray the expenses of maintaining county government, 
and were therefore known as pauper counties, whose local ex- 
penditures had to be paid from the treasury of the State. Among 
the summary that was read of all the replies th.t were received 
_ there was not one that afforded any indication of an appreciation on 
- the part of its writer of the real import of the inquiry about immi- 
gration. Three of these replies, though each forced me to smile, 
were painfully suggestive of the simplicity and naiveté of the people — 
of the county from which they came. One suggested that two 
hundred able-bodied girls might be welcomed, another that more 
Democrats were wanted, and the other that that county did not 
— want any more lawyers. 
? Let me exclude the possible conclusion from all minds, that hav- 
- ing partaken of the refined and generous hospitalities of Central 


Kentucky, and of that earnest welcome bestowed upon me by the 


large-framed, great-hearted, and sturdy men who came from all parts 
of the State to take council with each other as to how their own con- 
dition and that of their suffering fellow-citizens might be improved, 
Iam like an ingrate, abusing their hospitality and slandering them. 
If I have said or shall say a word that could wound the sensibility 
_iof any Kentuckian, it has not been used with that intent, and I beg 
_ the people of this wonderfully endowed State to remember the 
- Seriptural maxim that ‘‘faithful are the wounds of a friend.” 
But Iam not speaking otherwise here and now than I spoke to 
_ the members of the conference and the citizens of Kentucky who 
thronged the opera house, and gave me many proofs, during my 
_ address, that no offense was found in anything I said; but to repel — 
- beyond doubt so unjust a suspicion let me quote a parieraph here 
and there from the report of my remarks as I found them in the 
eo Courier-Journal of the next morning. 


* ie The happiness I am enjoying in this visit is simply inexpressible, for it 
~ seems to me that it is rounding out in a season of general felicitation all that is 
unpleasant in the memories of the past. [Applause. ] 
I am especially obliged to the board of trade for inviting me here to speak, 
for I want to ask a question or two about Kentucky, a question which you will 
not cheer, but which is well meant. I shall ask in a few minutes why Ken- 
_ tucky is a laggard among the States, and a laggard among the 


"ee REGENERATED SOUTHERN STATES. 


4 Yes; let me here ask you gravely, why this State, whose geology gives such - 
food to its plants as to make it the producer of the bravest men, most beautiful 


maidens, and most devoted matrons, not only of our own country, but of the 
: world; whose geological construction gives beauty and vigor and harmony of 


oo lL SS eee SN ree 8 time NRE Ae ane \y RS. 0 ee eS 
PO EO Ege ts Ct ee Oe, tel Geet ap es 


366 . WILLIAM D. KELLEY. 


construction and movement to all animated life; whose racers are the speediést 
and the most enduring, and whose grasses are unequaled in the world, so that _ 
Bi no imported stock lingers long enough to breed a progeny in the Bluegrass 
| State, that it does not improve upon its own type; why this State, endowed not 
only with such qualities as these, but whose coal and iron in joint measure ex- 
ceed in value the combined coal and iron of any other State in the Union—why 
this State, thus endowed and given such a community of men and women as 
are the native people of Kentucky, whose rivers are navigable for more miles © 
than those of any other member of our great Union, who is the first-born child, 
I may say the first-born daughter of the Union, if I may judge by the number 
of brave sons and beautiful daughters she has contributed to the population of 
other States—why is it that I heard stated last night with prepared deliberation 
that so much emigration takes place from the bluegrass, coal, and iron country 
of Kentucky that the immigration does not compensate for it? Why should 
people fly from such a paradise? It seemed to me as I listened to the talk on 
this subject in the convention last evening that you had realized that something 
was wrong, and were crying to each other, if not to the Almighty, what shall 
we do to be saved! |Laughter.] 

* * * * * * * 


Where all are engaged in one pursuit there must be an immense waste of 
time, energy, hope, and all that is valuable in life. Now, my friends, how can — 
we diversify the employments of your people? Willa tariff doit? I say yes, 
but it has not done it in Kentucky. I brought a paper with me to justify the — 
remark, which if I could not sustain by evidence would prove offensive, that 
Kentucky is proving to be a laggard not only in the great family of her sister 
States, but among the Southern States. 

Now, let us look at the position of Kentucky and of Louisville. No 
Southern city has a more advantageous one. It is near to the North and its 
commerce. I stand in the city to-day that bears to the whole of yonder — 
Southwest the relation that Chicago bears to the Northwest. And that it 
should with the growing diversification of the pursuits of the South grow, not — 
perhaps as rapidly as Chicago with its inland seas to contribute to its growth, — 
but so rapidly that its growth from decade to decade would seem marvelous to 
its own people. [Great applause.] This is the one great city of the State. I 
have not traveled much in the State, and I may be disparaging other cities. If 
I do I pray you correct me, gently, and believe I would not have done so but 
through ignorance. I believe in the whole South there is only one city to 
contest the palm with Louisville, and that is New Orleans, and yet Louisville 
is greater in all business than New Orleans, although New Orleans has a site — 
by the sea with invitations to external commerce. . 

* * % * * * % ere * 

* A surprising fact is that last year the Southern States, I may say the old — 
Te cotton-growing States, produced more iron than the whole Union produced — 
ie before it felt the quickening influence of the protective tariff of 1861. The — 
ee statistics of iron production began to be gathered by the American Iron and a 


Boh ee bee 


WILLIAM D. KELLEY. © SO Leis 4 


Steel Association in 1854. The Morrill tariff bill was enacted while James 
Buchanan was President of the United States, and bears his signature; it was Rie, 
a protective tariff to such an extent as that it restored the ordinary revenues of 
_ the Government which had been so exhausted that the salaries of the Govern- 
% “ment official could not be paid. But I am not speaking of that; I am speak- 
ing of the decade including 1854 and 1863, the latter year having felt the 
effects of the protective tariff, and having added something more than 100,000 
tons to the average of the other nine years. Now, the whole Union produced. 
in those ten years an average of 818,000 tons of pig-iron, and yet last year the 
South alone produced 875,000 tons, an increase of 62,000 tons over the average 
capacity of the whole Union in the ten years preceding the enactment of the 
protective tariff; yet with all this I had to say to the people of the South: a 
«You did not produce your share; you did not produce your pro rata of the = 
grand total, which had come to be between six and seven million tons under _ 
the inspiring influence of the protective tariff; 875,000 tons was not the quota 
of the South, whether measured by her area, by her population, or by her 
now known resources of ore and flux.” So I said to them: ‘‘ You have done 
well; now do better. You have, in common with the North, found what a 
_ protective tariff can do. 

Kentucky has had that same protection. She once‘was a leader in the 
Southern States in the production of iron. Sheshould be now; but she is not. 
She is the fifth of the iron-producing States of the South, and she has pro- ce 

_iduced less in the last six months than she did in the six months that pre- e 
i 
x 


ae Pee esta Sophy eral ee 
ee A ean ey as 


i ty bgt fe Wiser 
CS. PAS ae ae VR a 


ceded. Now, what is the matter with Kentucky? Why is the Blue-grass 
State thus delinquent? You may tell me she has done something else and 
better, and I will be glad to hear what it was; but during the last year Alabama ‘ 
walked forward until she is the fourth iron-producing State in the Union— et 
_ Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, and Alabama are the four leading iron-produc- A 
ing Statesin the Union. Alabama produced last year 283,859 tons; Tennessee, a 
- 199,106 tons; Virginia, 156,250 tons; West Virginia, the infant born of old 
' Virginia by the Cesarian operation, 98,618 tons; and Kentucky, with thou- 
‘sands of square miles more of available fuel than the British islands, and with 
_ stores of iron ore equal in quantity and quality to those of Great Britain, why 
is has she sunk beyond little new-born West Virginia, to 54,000 tons, and ona 
declining average at that? There is something wrong. Now, it cannot be 
_ with the people. You might as well say a Kentucky race-horse was not good 
as to say a Kentucky man is not full of life and vigor. You might as well ‘ 
‘say Kentucky cattle are of no account, and that the Government madeamis- 
_ take in either buying or taking all the Kentucky mules she couldduring the 
war because she believed them to be the best in the country. 
* * * * % * * 


' Coming back to the sorghum question, I was gratified at hearing that sor- 
_ ghum was the principal production of two counties, because if you could get 
-acapitalist to set up a-sugar-house and announce to your farmers that the 


ag company owning it would pay so much per ton for sorghum, depending on its 


368. WILLIAM. D REAR. 


saccharine strength, you would have a new industry; ‘you would have your 

farmers engage in something new, and you would have their sorghum giving” 

them once a year, or oftener, ready cash, a thing which I am told the 
mountaineers of Kentucky do not have much of. [Applause. ] 

: I heard it said here last night that in this State, so gifted with coal and 

. iron, half the counties were paupers, and could not defray the just county ex. 
penses: I do not say that it is true, but I do say that it was stated here; and © 
that I have reason to believe it, because no man arose and indignantly said: 
‘No, it isnot true. What! Pauper counties here in the home of Henry 
Clay; here where more than a century ago John Fitch was working among 
metals to establish that marvelous system of locomotion which now carries — 

- our internal commerce that exceeds in bulk and value every year the entire 
home and foreign trade of the British islands. John Fitch chose his native 
State of Kentucky, rich as he knew it to be in sources of wealth and power, 
to develop the steam-engine in its application first to water transit, and next 
to land transit. What! The people of the mountain counties of Kentucky — 
specimens of the wealth of which lie upon your table, including lead and iron 
ores, such as Pennsylvania cannot produce, are starving? The State by 
adoption of my namesake, whom I am happy to state believes we are from the 
same paternal stem, William Kelley, of Louisville, the inventor of the Besse- 

c: mer steel process, a native of Pennsylvania, but a Kentuckian by early train- 

. ing, and along life of manhood now crowned by more years than my own, 
aman who was famous among iron-workers of the country as the iron boiler 
who made allthe elements of the atmosphere and of the molten iron and fire, 
help carry the fluid from the heat that burning coal would give it to an in- 

- candescent condition and purified it and made steel of it for six years, before — 
Bessemer announced his discovery of the same thing. The counties of this — 
State said to be paupers? There is something wrong in Kentucky or these 

stories could not be circulated about her. Why, years ago Kentucky was 
selling nails to Pennsylvania; the first machine for cutting and heading nails ~ 
was invented and constructed in Kentucky. Yes, Lexington for many years ~ 
shipped nails to Pittsburgh; but the trade has gone now; you do not do it : 
now; you have not tried to doit. What isthe secret of the failure? 


My suggestion that there was something wrong in the condition 
of Kentucky, and my inquiries as to what caused her to be a eee 
gard, even among the Southern States, brought no response at the © 
time. The occasion has, however, been followed by letters from — 
intelligent men in many parts of the State, which have been author- | 
: itative and instructive, and have convinced me that ‘‘ King See. 

having staked his throne and prerogatives upon the arbitrament of — 
the battle-field and been beaten, his liege supporters in Kentucky — 
found new means of riaintaming their allegiance to a despotic — 
‘power, and have transferred the homage they once paid to King " 


eso Gtr wet Ore hee ree ys 


fi 


4 Re eee, “WILLIAM . D. ‘ALERY “306... 


Cotton to King Alcohol. Yes, correspondence and personal inter: 
‘course with intelligent gentlemen during the last four months have 
convinced me that our internal-revenue system has accomplished 
‘the establishment in Kentucky of a despotism whose power is as 
absolute and whose theories of government, so far as they relate to 


the duty of preventing the development of the mining and manu- 
facturing possibilities or the diversification of the agricultural indus- 
tries of Kentucky are concerned, is as effective as was that of King 
Cotton in the legitimate cotton States of the Old South. 


From many letters received on this subject I present so much of 


two as expose the thraldom in which Kentucky is bound and the 


machinations by which the whisky trust holds the writers and their 
fellow sufferers in industrial subjection. One of these letters was 
received on the 17th of March and the other some time later, but the 


testimony of the writers that the people of Kentucky who desire to 
live in harmony with the spirit of the age, and to give their native 
State. the position to which her resources entitle her in the New 


South, can hope for redemption by the action of Congress alone from 


the terrible thraldom in which they are held is confirmed by that of 


many other competent witnesses. But let the writers speak. for 


themselves. I submit first so much of the letter of March 17 as is 
portinent to the question under consideration, and will follow it 
with an equally pertinent extract from the other letter to which I 


have especially referred. 


* * * * * * * 


a Do you know fully. (I know you know in the general way) why the in- 


ternal-revenue tax on whisky ought to be wiped out ? 


It is because so long as the internal-revenue law exists it bands together 


the wholesale dealer in whisky, the distillers and hangers-on, such as bank 
presidents who loan on whisky, making them a close corporation upon which 
the Democratic wire-pullers and managers can, whenever the Democratic 
party here is in danger of being beaten (and it has been so several times lately) 
call upon it for money in bags and in sufficient amounts to turn the scale 


against the Republicans. 


_ Wipe out the internal-revenue law, and they can’t find another source 
where money can be had in bulk, at the moment of defeat, in sufficient 
amounts to turn the defeat into a victory. Hoping you may be able to have 


the whole thing wiped out. 
I We * % * * * % 


in the recent defalcation of our State treasurer—$200,000 to $400,000—many 


se ee Ha BRD ON ABT Sind. Soe TOES ee nee Meee 
Se arte oe Se es ee anne ae OS Gin APO sea 


‘ things go to show that this fund of the State of Kentucky has for years been at_ 


re 


“WILLIAM D. KULLEY. = 


the service of the whisky ring. It was inevitable. Without the whisky ring 
the Democratic party would lose its hold on the State offices, and so the whisky 
ring and the Democratic ring are nearly identical. Now that the explosion at 
our State capital has occurred no more money can be had from the Kentucky 
treasury. Away with the revenue system and scatter the funds that are now 
en masse, held ready to use against the Republicans in Kentucky, by a law of 
the United States. Disperse em. It kills manufactures other than whisky in 
Kentucky. For instance, as a matter of fact, a great bank in Louisville, not 
national: To it goes the owner of 100 or 10,000 barrels of Bourbon whisky— 
known brand of Kentucky; he does not have to go to the president nor cashier, 
only to the discount clerk in charge; there is his table, 76, 77, 78, '79, 80, 81, 82, 
83, 84, 85, 86, 87, date; on each or any of these you can have so much and renew 
ad libitum practically; make out your note, attach your bonded-warehouse 
-receipt—fiat. Buta manufacturer of general merehandise would not have the 
slightest show for a loan, because the bank could not sell his chairs, his plant, 
or any implement. No bonded-warehouse receipt can cover them, but with the 
United States holding up things, the whisky ring is omnipotent, and the general 
manufacturer has to go elsewhere. 


In conclusion I submit, that with the facts presented these letters 
show that it was by the provisions of law imposing taxes on distilled 
spirits that the ‘‘ whisky trust” was called into existence, and en- 
abled to accomplish the revival of the despotism which pervaded the 
Southern States before the war; and that the power of this ‘‘ trust” 
and the combinations of Democratic politicians with the banking 
influence of Kentucky can be broken only by the repeal of the in- 
ternal taxes, the perpetuation of which is the issue presented to the 
American people by the President in his free-trade message and by 
the Southern gentlemen who have dominated the counsels of the 
Committee on Ways and Means and submitted this bill to the House 
for consideration. For myself I will stand for the protective system 
and the maintenance of such rates of duties as will insure the de- 
velopment of all the resources of the country, increase the number 
of its industries, and, perpetuate its independence, commercial and 
industrial as well as political. This happy consummation cannot be 
achieved if the internal-tax system is to be maintained, for the sur- 
plus is a condition that cannot be perpetuated with safety to our 
republican institutions. : 

The purity of the Government, the safety of business, and the 
morals of the people demand the abatement of the surplus by the 
repeal of the special war taxes from which it flows. If we shall fail 
to abolish these taxes, and in addition to the hoarding of millions of 
dollars in the Treasury of the United States, we also maintain a 


ns ¢ "s more ae our money shall ee aioe i ae aie 
fo of the . Maat trust’ 10. its war upon our industries pe 


em» 


HON. JOHN G. CARLISLE, 


OF KENTUCKY. 
(Democratic Side.) 


‘Mr. Caruiste (the Speaker). Mr. Chairman, I am very much 
obliged to the committee for its courtesy in granting me an unlim- 
ited extension of time, but I shall endeavor to confine my remarks 
within the usual ote even if compelled to omit some matters — 
which it had been my purpose to discuss. 

I shall not attempt to follow the distinguished gentleman from — 
Maine [Mr. REED] in all the arguments he has made, or in all the 
illustrations he has submitted to the committee; for, in fact, I was 


__ unable to hear a large part of what the gentleman said. cont 


The gentleman,started out with the proposition that the support-— 
ers of the pending bill are either inconsistent or insincere, or perhaps 
both; because, he says, if protection is wrong, a tariff for revenue 1s 
also wrong; that there is no difference in principle between them, 
the difference being only in degree. Therefore the gentleman’s ~ 
argument is that the supporters of this bill should advocate ab- 
solute free trade. I might retort upon the gentleman by saying — 
that if the doctrine of protection is correct, then that doctrine 
should be carried by its friends to its logical and legitimate re-— 
sults—absolute prohibition of foreign imports. [But the gentle-— 


man from Maine has made this unnecessary, because he has 


announced that such is his purpose, and the purpose of his political — 
associates, if necessary, and that they will preserve in this country — 
all of its own trade and wealth, even if compelled to erect a Chinese 
wall around it. [Applause on the Democratic side.] Sir, China pre-— 
served all the trade and wealth of her own people within her own 
limits for thousands of years, but I do not think that the advocates — 
of diversified industries or the friends of labor can find much to 
encourage them in the social and industrial condition of that coun- , 
try to-day. [Renewed applause on the Democratic side.] There the 
doctrine of protection, pure and simple, was carried to its logical re- 

sults, and it produced its inevitable effects. “With the oldest civiliza- 

; 372 7 


ae Re) pee ee eee PA ee Ree ae ee A) ee oh See ad Fe Oe OR Oe gy) ed ee) a ree, OER EN Roa. SNA a nee ier caer eae Ck 
a wD > Sal Fos 7 Se + § : Massie he ‘ . Sie TN a eae 12 


TOHN GF CARLIBEM = Be 


a tion in the world, with every variety of soil and climate and natural 
4 resources, with a frugal and industrious people, with a literature 
-abounding in philosophical and speculative thought, the useful arts 
d and manufactures are still in their infancy, and labor is still the 
_ abject slave of capital. [Applause on the Democratic side. ] 
: No, sir; we do not want another China here, nor do we want or 
expect absolute free trade. We all recognize the fact, which I suppose | 
even the gentleman from Maine will concede, that the Government 
must have a revenue for its support, and that this revenue must be 
_ raised by taxation in some form or other. I presume the gentleman 
_ from Maine will also concede that all taxation is an evil which it 
_ would be well to avoid, if possible, but that as it cannot be avoided 
- entirely we are simply reduced to a choice between that system 
~ which would confine the trade of our own people, in a large measure 
at least, to our own limits without increasing the revenues of the 
- Government, and the more liberal system which will make trade 
and. commerce as free as possible consistently with the raising of 
- sufficient revenue for the support of the Government. [Applause on 
the Democratic side.]| If our manufacturing or mining industries, 
or any other industries in the country, receive a benefit by the 
- imposition of duties upon imported goods under this system, they 
are entitled to it and they are welcome to it. [Renewed applause. ] 
- Itis impossible to impose taxes under any system that can be de- 
_ vised without hurting somebody or helping somebody; and for my 
- part—and I think this is the sentiment of my political associates on 
_ this floor—I would rather help them than hurt them. [Renewed ~ 
- applause on the Democratic side. ] 
- But, Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Maine, in all his long | 
“Aiscourse, lasting nearly two hours, made no reference whatever to a8 
the actual situation which now confronts us—a, situation which 
_ makes it the imperative duty of the Representatives of the people to 
reduce the revenues before this Congress shall adjourn. [Applause 
-~ on the Democratic side.] It appears from the last official statement 
_ that there was in the Treasury at the close of the last month, includ- SS 
_ ing subsidiary and minor coins, the sum of $136, 143,357.95 over and ea 
_ above allthe current liabilities of the Government. This was 
 $56,676,662.65 more than the surplus on hand on the 1st day of 
_ December, 1887, and shows that there has been since that date an 
_ average monthly increase of $11,335,332.15. The surplus accumula- 
- tion each month under the existing system of taxation is more than 
a total cost of the Government during the first two years of 
Washington’s administration, while the aggregate sum 1s consider- 
ably in excess of the whole expenditure of the Government during 


A 


ai 
4 


I OME >) ve SIME Dam RN Bs al Riiths ETI Va aa lp ee Ot ae ee RE ate et, ne ey Rei Fe Be el Mele” 2 
FAERIE PEELE CN A SOME OE I CORSE TE Sag OAT OE ey OL vs ne et 
aN ¥ i m = aa, 2 > St aa 
‘ %, 


- JOHN @. CARLISLE. an ede 


the first felon: years of its existence cedee the Constitution, in: | 
cluding civil and miscellaneous expenses, war, navy, Indians, por ; 


sions, and interest on the public debt. 


Every dollar of this enormous sum has been taken by law from 
the productive industries and commercial pursuits of the people at — 
a time when it was sorely needed for the successful prosecution — 


of their business, and under circumstances which afford no excuse 


whatever for the exaction. [Applause on Democratic side.] There — 


is not a monarchical government in the world, however absolute its 
form or however arbitrary its power, that would dare to extort such 


a tribute from its subjects in excess of the proper requirements of — 


the public service [renewed applause]; and the question which Con- 
- gress is now compelled to determine is whether such a policy can be 
longer continued here in this country, where the people are supposed 
to govern in their own right and in their own interest. 


During the progress of this debate more than one gentleman on | 


the other side has referred to the enormous surplus now in the Treas- 
ury as a matter of but little consequence; and in fact there are some 
who appear to regard it as a blessing, rather than a misfortune, that 
we should have more than $130,000,000 of the people’s money with- 
drawn from the channels of trade and securely locked up in the 


vaults of the Government. Sir, I can imagine no financial condition — 
more dangerous to the integrity of legislation and the prosperity of — 
the country than that which results from the existence of a large © 
surplus in the public Treasury. Even if it were possible for such a 


surplus as we now have to accumulate without the imposition of any 


tax or burden upon the people, it would still be, in my opinion a very — 


great misfortune, because the inevitable effect would be to encourage 


useless and extravagant appropriations in violation of those principles — 


of public economy which are absolutely essential for the preservation 


of a popular government with constitutional limitations upon its — 


powers. [Applause. ] 
If there be any serious danger now nrcathine our institutions, it 


is the growing disposition among those who represent particular — 
classes and special interests to disregard the checks and break down ~ 
the barriers of the Constitution in a promiscuous scramble for a 
division of the public treasure. Fortunately there is in no part of 


the country any feeling of opposition to the proper exercise of public 


authority, either State or Federal. On the os the prevailing — 
tendency is toward the enlargement and extension of governmental — 
power by construction, especially in matters involving the SPECS : 


priation and expenditure of money. 


When the Government has collected, or is collecting, more money i 


4 % 
than it needs, the Peon realizing the injustice of a policy which un- 
é necessarily deprives them of a part of their earnings, are almost sure 
todemand its return in some form or other. If the Government 
: may rightfully exercise the power of taxation for other than public 
shale it is difficult to convince those who pay the money that it 


- cannot also rightfully exercise the power of appropriation for other | 


P than public purposes. It is safe to say, therefore, that so long as this 
. policy shall be continued, not only willlargesses ani bounties for the 
- promotion of purely private interests be demanded, but new fields 
: ror the exercise of legislative power and new objects for the appro- 

priation of the public money will be discovered. 

But it is said that we still have outstanding a large public debt, 
- and that no great injury can result to the country if the present 

rates of taxation shall be continued and the surplus revenue used in 
- the purchase of bonds. I agree, Mr. Chairman, that so long as we 
have a surplus its application to the extinguishment of the public 
- debt is the very best use that can be made of it. [Applause.] But I 
- totally dissent from the proposition that it would be wise or just to 
_ raise a surplus revenue by taxation merely for the purpose of pur- 
_ thasing at a premium the unmatured bonds of the Government, 
except so far as may be necessary to meet the requirements of the 
_ sinking-fund law; and I am not satisfied that it would not be good 
_ policy, if the revenue could be properly reduced, to suspend the 
_ operation of that law, in whole or in part, for a reasonable time. It 
is not possible to defend, and it would be ruinous to perpetuate, a 
fiscal policy which compels the people to pay to the public creditors 
BE uyenty five cents on the dollar more than the obligations of the 

Government call for; and yet that is just what we are doing and 

_ just what we must continue to do unless the revenue is reduced by 
co the passage of this or some other bill. 

On the 17th day of last month the Secretary of the Treasury, in 

: _ pursuance of authority conferred upon him by the law of March, 
‘ 1881, as interpreted by the two Houses of Congress, issued a circular 
_ inviting proposals for the sale of bonds to the Government. The 
_ first purchase was made under this invitation on the 18th day of 
| _ April, and between that date and the close of business yesterday, a 


_ period of one month, he has purchased on account of the Govern- 


ment 4 per cent. bonds to the amount of $13,456,500, upon which 
: interest had accrued at the date of the purchase to the amount of 

$53,172.07. For these bonds he was compelled to pay the sum of 
a viz 046,136.06, which was $3,536,464 more than the principal and ac- 
crued interest, or a premium of 261 per cent. During the same time 


JOHN G CARLISLE Se Oa 


and uader the same authority he purchased 4} per cent, bonds to the 


rid 


376 7 JOHN @. CARLISLE. 


amount of $12,404,450, upon which interest had accrued to the amount 
of $108,086.55. For these bonds he paid the sum of $13,379,188.37, 
which was $866,652.37 in excess of the principal and interest. The 
premium paid upon this class of bonds was nearly 7 per cent. 

This is the situation into which the Government has been fonnede 
by the failure of Congress in past years to make provision for a reduc- 
tion of taxation. Millions of dollars which ought to have remained in 
the hands of the people who earned the money by their labor and by 
their skill in the prosecution of business have been taken away from 
them by law to be paid out to the bondholders in excess of their legal 
demands against the Government. [Applause.] And, sir, if the 
present Congress shall adjourn without applying a remedy, this 
unjust process must go on for an indefinite length of time. In the 
presence of such a situation we cannot afford to quarrel about trivial 
details. A reduction of the revenue—not by increasing taxation, as" 
some propose, but by diminishing taxation in such a manner as will 
afford the largest measure of relief to the people and their industries 
—should be the great and controlling object to which everything else 
should be subordinated. [Applause.] I do not mean that every interest, 
however small and apparently insignificant, should not be carefully | 
considered in a friendly spirit, but I do mean that the general inter. 
ests of the many should not be subordinated to the special interests 
e the few. [Applause.] Bis 

‘Although the question now presented is purely a practical one, 
it necessarily involves, to some extent, a discussion of the conflicting 
theories of taxation which have divided the people of this country 
ever since the organization of the Government. There is a funda- 
mental and irreconcilable difference of opinion between those who 
believe that the power of taxation should be used for public pur- 
poses only, and that the burdens of taxation should be equally dis- 
tributed among all the people according to their ability to bear 
them, and those who believe that it is the right and duty of the 
Wh odrament to promote certain private enterprises and increase the 
profits of those engaged in them by the imposition of higher rates 
than are necessary to raise revenue for the proper administration of - 
public affairs; and so long as this difference exists, or at least so long 
as the policy of the Government is not permanently settled and ac- 
quiesced in, these conflicting opinions will continue to embarrass the | 
representatives of the people in their efforts either to increase or 
reduce taxation. igs: 

While no man in public life would venture to advocate excessive 
taxation merely for the purpose of raising excessive revenue, many 
will advocate it, or at least excuse it, when the rates are so adjusted 


vi li wh ops ks eae Se ie SS eee BE Ee ie HN DAs ee Um en Ta [are ee Pon ore 
og a ni. 


ek i a 
ee y % 


ore 


id es ne Wii: 
vires 

ts ge tke 

Ss 


< 


7 ouN es CARLISLE. 


or the objects of taxation are so selected as to secure advantages, or _ 
supposed advantages, to some parts of the country or to some classes 
of industries over other parts and other classes; and this, Mr. Chair- 
man, is the sole cause of the difficulties we are now encountering in ae 
. Our efforts to relieve the people and reduce the surplus. It isthe 
: _ sole cause of the unfortunate delay that has already occurred inthe — 
revision of our revenue laws, and if the pending bill shall be de- 
_ feated and disaster in any form shall come upon the country by 
- reason of overtaxation and an accumulation of money in the Treas- 
bs this unjust feature in our present system will be responsible for __ 
[Applause. ] p 
EWwhenever an attempt is made to emancipate labor from the ser- 
_ vitude which an unequal system of taxation imposes upon it, when- - 
- ever it is proposed to secure as far as possible to each individual” eo 
citizen the full fruits of his own earnings, subject only to the actual ~~ 
necessities of the Government, and whenever a measure is presented 
_ for the removal of unnecessary restrictions from domestic industries © 
and international commerce, so as to permit freer production and 
_ freer exchanges, the alarm is sounded and all the cohorts of monopoly ve 
are assembled to hear their heralds proclaim the immediate and ir- = 
 't retrievable ruin of the country. [Applause.] ae 


-_ 
-_ 


me... We have been told over and over again during this debate that 
_ the passage of the pending bill will destroy many valuable industries 
now flourishing in various parts of the country; that it will deprive 
_ thousands of laborers of employment and greatly reduce the wages 
of those who continue to work; and the gentleman from Maine, who 
__ has just spoken, has substantially repeated the gloomy predictions to 
-_ which the House has listened so often during the last three weeks, 
- ir, if I believed that the passage of this measure would injure a 
_ single honest industry or reduce the wages of those who are em- 
ployed in it, I would, notwithstanding the great emergency which . 
— confronts us, hesitate long before giving it my support. [Applause ee 
- -onjthe Democratic side.] But in my opinion the reductions now 
‘proposed on dutiable imports, and the proposed additions to the free 
list, will be beneficial to the manufacturers themselves as well as to | 
_ their laborers and the consumers of their products; and as the Repre- 
sentatives from New England on the other side of the House appear 
_ to be especially alarmed concerning the injurious effects of this bill 
upon the great manufacturing industries in their part of the country, 
it may not be inappropriate to call their attention to a few historical 
ets connected with our tariff legislation in the past and the effects 
low rates of duty upon the prosperity of their people. The highest — 
rate of duty imposed by the tariff act of 1846 upon any class of woolen _ 


JOHN G. CARLISLE. 


goods, cotton fabrics, manufactures of leather, and of hardware, was 
30 per cent. ad valorem, and upon most kinds of cotton goods it was — 


only 25 per cent. These were the industries in which New England — 


was most largely engaged, and her Representatives here, except those 


from the State of Maine, who were divided upon the question, pro- — 


- tested against the passage of that act, as they now protest against the — 


- passage of the pending bill, upon the ground that it would paralyze — | 
and ruin these great interests. The Representatives from Massachu- ~ 
setts, Rhode Islana, Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Vermont — 


voted unanimously against. the bill, with the exception of Mr. Col- 


lamer, of Vermont, who did not vote at all. But it passed neverthe- 
Jess, and became a law; and now, Mr. Chairman, let us see what its _ 


effect was upon the most important industries of these great manu- 


facturing States, and what the subsequent action of their Represen- — 
tatives was after an experience of eleven years under these moderate — 


rates of duty. 


We have no authentic statistics showing the progress made by man- 


ufacturing industries between 1846 and 1857 as aseparate and distinct 


_ period of time, but it may’ be fairly assumed that the full force and ry 


effect of the new rates of duty were realized at least as early as the 


census year 1849, and we have the census returns of 1850 and 1860, _ 
the latter based upon the productions of the year 1859, to which I beg 


_ leave to invite the attention of gentlemen from New England and 


other gentlemen who believe that low tariffs destroy manufactures _ 


and pauperize labor. During the period mentioned the value of all 


our woolen manufactures increased more than 42 per cent.; the num- ~ 
~ber of hands employed increased 18} per cent., but the total amount — 
of wages paid increased nearly 37 per cent. [applause], showing that — 
the percentage of increase in the amount of wages paid was twice as 


great as the percentage of increase in the number of hands em- 


ployed. [Applause.] Taking all the New England States together % 
the increase in the value of the product in this industry was 62 


per cent. The increase in Massachusetts was 54 per cent. ; in Rhode © 
Island, 176 per cent.; in Vermont, 614 per cent., and in Maine, 834 — 


per cent. In the manufacture of hosiery the progress during the ten : 
years under consideration was almost marvelous. In the Hastern — 


States the increase in the value of the product was 481 per cent. It 


was 523 per cent in Connecticut, 377 per cent in New Hane sa 


and 373 per cent in Massachusetts. 


What was the effect upon the manufacture of cotton fabrics i in 2: 


New England and in the whole country?) Why, sir, the value of the 


production in the United States increased 77 per cent., the number “i 
of hands employed increased 28} per cent., and the total angie a oe a 


ass 


J OHN G. CARLISLE, 


" — ‘e 


4 increase in the value of the product was over 81 per cent., in the 
- number of hands employed 28 per cent., and in the amount of wages 
a paid 36 per cent. Massachusetts increased her product 77 per cent., 

New Hampshire 55 per cent., Rhode Island over 87 per cent. , Con- 


necticut 116 per cent., Maine 137 per cent., and Moscone 274 per 


cent. 


_ In the six New England States the increase in the value of a 


product in the manufacture of boots and shoes was 83 per cent. ; 


- Massachusetts the increase was 92 per cent., in Connecticut 10 oe if 


cent., in Maine 99 per cent., and in Rhode Island 307 per cent, The 
production i in New England alone i in 1860 was greater than the aggre- 
gate production of all the States of the Union in 1850. In the manufac- 
ture of hardware New England increased the value of her product 
~ 100 per cent., and in this industry also her product in 1860 was 
- greater than the product of all the States in 1850. 
Instead of paralyzing the industries and pauperizing labor in New 
England, or any other part of the country for that matter, the tariff 
act of 1846 infused new life and vigor into our languishing manufac- 
tures and secured more constant employment and higher wages to 
our laboring people; and the consequence was' that even the strong 
“prejudices of New England were removed by actual experience, and 
in 1857 every Representative from that part of the country who 


voted at all voted for a bill making an almost uniform reduction of — 
- 20 per cent. from the rates imposed by the act of 1846 and placing 


: many additional articles upon the free-list. 


_ Here is the vote upon the tariff act of 1857, as it first passed the 


- House, a Republican House over which Nathaniel P. Banks, of Massa- 
_ ehusetts, presided as Speaker. Five of the six Representatives from 
_~ Maine voted for it, and the other one, who was absent when the vote 
was taken, had made a speech in favor of its passage. Nine of the 
_ ten Representatives from Massachusetts voted in the affirmative, 
and the other was in the chair and did not vote. Every Represen- 


tative from New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut, and Rhode | 


_ Island was present and voted for the bill, and among them appears 
_ the name of the venerable and distinguished Senator who still 
serves his State at the other end of the Capitol, Hon. Justin 8. 


ee 


_ MOorRILt. 


ae Representatives from New England voted in the affirmative 


Re MLE TARR CE te ak pia? Grea 
a us ee? 3879 ‘Ss 


; ices paid increased 39 per cent, [Applause.] In New England the 


Peay eet SU)e See edeos oS 


nd nine in the negative. Two-thirds of the.men chosen by the 


people of New England to represent their interests in Congress de- s 
clared by this vote that a further reduction would be beneficial to- | 
their industries, and thus the tariff act of 1857, which we have sO” 
often heard denounced on the other side of the House, became the — 
law of the land by the votes of Republican and New England Rep- _ 
resentatives. or 
These Representatives of the greatest manufacturing section of the — 
country had seen their industries grow and prosper as they had 
us never grown and prospered before; they had seen capital realizing 
ee adequate returns upon its investment; they had seen the number of 
6 laborers employed constantly increasing and the rates of wages con- © 
__ tinually rising, and they had seen at the same time the agricultural 
and commercial interests of the people in all parts of the country ~ 
flourishing to an extent which the wildest enthusiast had scarcely _ 
dreamed of before. All these things they had seen, Mr. Chairman; — 
but there are other things with which we have grown perfectly fa- 
miliar in these times of high-tariff and class legislation which they 
did not see. They did not see great monopolies and trusts created 
* to limit the supply and control the prices of the necessaries of life. — 
~ [Great applause.] They did not see enormous fortunes accumulated 
_ ina few years by corporations and individuals engaged in favored — a 
- industries, while the great mass of the people were struggling hard - 2 
~ to live comfortably and pay their taxes; nor did they see at any — 
% time during that period, as we have seen, thousands of honest labor- 3 ; 
--- ers parading the streets of our cities clamoring for work, or as- 
- sembling around our mines and factories with hired police to watch : 
them. [Applause. ] ited 
* This was the experience of the Representatives from the New Eng- . 
_ land States during the eleven years from 1846 to 1857, under alow — 
Os tariff; and is it any wonder, Mr. Chairman, that they came here see | 
by a unanimous vote demanded a still further reduction in the inter- : 
est of the manufacturers? [Applause.] And if this bill shall pass — 
and become a law, I predict that within less than eleven years from < 
this time the gentlemen who now represent New England on this — 
floor and oppose this bill will be here voting for a further reduction, — 
or the people will send somebody here who will so vote. [Applause. ie ra 
Mr. Chairman, if time would permit I would like to submit some — 
of the opinions delivered by the leading representatives of our manu- ss 
facturing interests during the debate upon the tariff act of 1857, and — 
even at the risk of dwelling too long upon this subject I will venture ~ 
to read a few short extracts from the speech of Henry Wilson, ¢ 
Massachusetts, afterwards Vice- Ereesent of the United States, a se 


condition and necessities ‘and of his constituents, Among other 
- things he said: | 


~The manufacturers, Mr. Chairman, make no war upon the wool- cron 
| "They assume that the reduction of the duty on wool, or repeal of the duty al- 


tion, and diminish the importation of foreign woolen manufactures, and afford 


will be more beneficial to the wool-growers, to the agricultural interests, than 

zs the present policy. The manufacturers of woolen fabrics, many of them men 

of large experience and extensive knowledge, entertain these views, and they 

: are sustained in these opinions by the experience of the great manufacturing 
~ nations of the Old World. 


; of 
Beis Tay 


the production of native wool has increased more than 100 per cent. They 
- experience of England, France, and Belgium demonstrates the wisdom of that 
Seley which makes the raw material duty free. Let us profit by their ex- 


When this speech was delivered wool had been admitted free of 

Panty in England for a period of less than thirteen years, and yet the 

, _ \ testimony of this distinguished New England Senator was that it had 

_ already doubled the product of native wool in that country. In the 
same speech he said further : 


ee Tf our manufactures are to increase, to keep pace with the population and 
- the growing wants of our people; if we are to have the control of the markets 
f our own country; if we are to meet with and compete with the manufac- 


is “world, we must have our raw materials admitted duty free or at a mere nomi- 


* * ergs * *% * * 


é “We of New England believe that wool, especially the cheap wools, 


ig articles used in our manufactories can be admitted duty free, or for a mere 
- nominal duty, without injuring to any extent any considerable interest of the 


~ Further on he said : . 


to the Senate and os eoaeeey: that the Commonwealth I respresent on this 
oor—I say in part, for my colleague, Mr. Sumner, after an enforced abseneey 
f more than nine months, is here to-night to give his vote if he can raise his 
a, y ce for the interest of his State—has a deep interest in the modification of — 
tariff of 1846 by this Congress. Her merchants, manufacturers, mechan: 


together, will infuse vigor.into that drooping interest, stimulate home produc- — 


~asteady and increasing demand for American wool. They believe this policy: 


_ ‘*Since the reductions of duties on raw materials in England, since wool was 
- admitted free, her woolen manufactures have so increased, so prospered, that 


a. 


é 


“fnrers of England and other nations of western Europe in the markets of the 


882 2 JORN @. CARLISLE: peat bas 


ics, and pysiness men in all departments of a varied ind gaat want action now 
before the Thirty-fourth Congress passes away. Pest 
‘«They are for the reduction of the revenue to the actual wants of an 
economical administration of the Government; for the depletion of the Treas- 
ury, now full with millions of hoarded gold; for a free-list embracing articles 
of prime necessity we do not produce; for mere nominal duties on articles 
which make up a large portion of our domestic industry, and for such an ad- 
justment of the duties on the-productions of other nations that come in direct 
competition with the product of American capital, labor, and skill as shall 


_impose the least burdens on that capital, labor, and skill.” 


- In the same debate Mr. Morriiu, of Vermont, said: 


‘On Sheffield hardware, such as cutlery, edged tools, files, and saws, 
some protection is needed a little longer, but for this 20 per cent is ample; 
and upon all other kinds 10 per cent., I feel quite sure, is fully sufficient.” 


The present duty on cutlery is 50 per cent., just two and a half — 
times the amount which Mr. Morriu said was fully sufficient more 


_ than thirty-one years ago. On files the duty now runs from 


52 to 65 per cent., an average of three times the rate specified by 
Mr. MorRIL; and on hardware it- is now three times ahatanla” 
thought was necessary. e 
Mr. Chairman, it is customary in all our debates on the toridt for in 
gentlemen on the other side to depict in the-darkest colors the con- — 


dition of the country during the financial depression of 1857. That 
-depression, from which the country recovered in a few months, was — 


an insignificant incident in our history in comparison with the great 
industrial, commercial, and financial storm which began here in ~ 
1873 and devastated the country for five years [applause], closing 
mills and factories, extinguishing the fires in our furnaces, ruining ~ 
banking and mercantile houses, and throwing hundreds of thou-— ms 
sands of laboring people out of employment, Under a low tariff our 7 
industries soon revived and the country started again, like an — 
awakened giant, on its march to wealth and power [applause], but ri 
under a high tariff it struggled on for five weary years, and, forthe 
first time?7in its history, was brought face to face with those diffi- 
cult and dangerous social problems which still confront us, and — 


. _which it will require all the’ wisdom and patriotism of her ablestand _ 
best citizens to solve, ; 


It has been repeatedly charged here and elsewhere that the: . 


_ credit of the Government was so reduced by the act of 1857 that it 


was compelled to sell its bonds at a discount of 12 per cent. The aA 
gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Burrows], speaking of the effects: of . 
the acts of 1846 and 1857, said: 


‘ $4 nee 


i : ° E f at ta ve 
D = 2 i) ay oF. : 
en > 4 Loe er il J : ony ? t< 
: 3 | tl a ae 
ot Oe ge a acer Bet Ty) eerste ee Oe 


ee ee Siac ages oe 


‘* But this brief period of prosperity was quickly followed by the revenue 
tariff of 1846 and 1847, which brought to the country another era of industrial — 
depression, culminating in the bankruptcy of 1857, the disastrous conse- 
quences of which are still within the memory of living men. Universal 
bankruptcy confronted the people, and the government, with an empty Treas- 
ury, was forced in a time of peace to borrow money at a discount of from 12. 
to 380 per cent.” 


I hold in my hand a volume issued from the Treasury Department 
in 1881, while Mr. Windom was Secretary, giving the history of all 
the loans negotiated by the Government from the time of its organi- — 
zation to the date of the publication; and this account, taken from 
the official records, shows that from the time of the passage of the 
tariff act of 1846 down to the last few days of Mr. Buchanan’sadmin- | 
istration, when civil war was imminent, not a bond or Treasury 
note or Government ‘obligation in any form was sold at less than 
par, while many of them having but a short time to run and bearing 
but 5 per cent. interest were sold at a very considerable premium in 
gold. [Applause.] After the passage of the Morrill tariff bill, in 
March, 1861, and after the Democratic administration had gone out 
and a Republican administration had come in, twenty-year bonds, 
bearing 6 per cent. interest, were sold at 15 per cent. discount. 
[Applause.] But does the gentleman think it would be fair to charge 
this to the high tariff of 1861? Does the gentleman think that it 
would be fair for me to say that these bonds were sold at a discount 
because the rates of duty on imported goods had been increased by 
the act of March 2, 1861? Sir, I would be ashamed of myself if I 
should make such a charge. [Applause on the Democratic side. ] 

_ The truth is that the credit of the Government was always good 
until the breaking out of the civil war, or at least until it became 
evident that there was to be a great civil commotion in this country. 
But, Mr. Chairman, I have already devoted too much time to this 
part of the subject. My only excuse for it is that there has been so 
much misunderstanding or misrepresentation concerning the history 
of what the gentlemen on the other side call the ‘‘ free-trade” period 
that it seemed necessary to make some allusion to it. } 
Mr. Chairman, during the last fiscal year the average rate of 
aaty upon dutiable imports was about $48 upon each $100 worth of 
goods, and the revenue collected from that source was more than 
$212,000,000. During the same time the Government collected about. : 
$119, 000,000 under the internal-revenue laws, nearly all of which 
came from the taxes on distilled spirits, fermented liquors, and 
1 peered tobacco. In the fiscal year 1866, which was the first 


“JOHN G- CARTIBUM 8 ee oe fae 


Ore G. CARLISLE, es 
ne om 


entire fiscal year after the close of “the war, the receipts hoe 
. internal-revenue taxes amounted to nearly S311, 000,000, while the | 


receipts from customs, or tariff taxes, amounted to $179, 000,000, and — 
the rate upon aateble goods was $40. 19 upon each $100 worth. pte 
This brief statement shows that while the receipts from customs — 


- have largely increased, the receipts under the internal-revenue laws — 
shave been greatly diminished, and that the taxes imposed by those ~ 


laws are now collected from a few articles of luxury, or of taste, the — 
use of which could be almost, if not entirely, dispensed with withene Be 
injury to the people. There are many who believe, in view of the © 
large reductions heretofore made in the internal-revenue taxes, and ~ 
in view of the fact that they are not now imposed upon articles oft 
necessity, that the whole reduction now so much needed and so 
urgently demanded by the country should be accomplished by the - 
revision of the tariff laws; but the framers of the pending bill, — 


- recognizing and respecting “the differences of opinion which exist — 


upon this question, have proposed to deal with both systems of taxa- 
tion. They propose to make a reduction of $78,000,000 based upon 
the receipts of the fiscal year 1887. About $54,000, 000 of this is pro- — 
posed to be taken from the tariff taxes and about $24,000,000 from =. 
the internal-revenue receipts by the repeal of the tax on tobaten and — “% 


a _ the abolition of certain special taxes upon dealers and others. x 


Bese 


upon their industries, earnestly protest that the consumers of their 
_ products shall have no relief, or at least that they shall not have th : 
- full measure of relief contemplated by this bill. In 1866 there wa 


- ceeding $600 the sum of $72,982,159, and from manufacturers and 


eas _ tobacco, the sum of $127,230,609. Every vestige of this enormou 
burden upon our manufacturing industries has been removed, an 


secure a removal of the charges upon their industries. _ In 18 


So far the opposition to the bill has been directed mainly against 
that part of it which proposes to repeal or reduce the tax upon cer- in 
tain classes of imported goods; and gentlemen, speaking for the inter-_ 
ests which have long ago been relieved of all the burdens imposed _ 


collected from the incomes of those having net annual receipts ex- 


their products, excluding distilled spirits, fermented liquors, and. 


properly removed, but the high rates of duty imposed on importe 
goods, to compensate for this domestic taxation, have not been ‘re 

moved. It was a very great mistake, to say the least, that the} 
were not both removed at the same time, for after having affordec 
relief to one side it seems almost impossible to secure relief for 
other. There never was a time while these heavy internal taxes 
mained upon their products that the manufacturers would not hay 
been glad to surrender a large part of the tariff duties in order 


- SimeMay, of Ohio, who was cupiless ‘tartar with ‘the views. oe 3 
those’ engaged i in manufacturing industries, said in a speech in he. is 
Senate: 


ule 


se Every law imposing a duty on imported goods is necessarily a restraint on 3 
fade. It imposes a burden upon the purchase and sale of imported goods and — 
fends to prevent their importation. ‘T'he expression ‘a free-trade tariff’ in- 
e: ES ies an absurdity.” 


ae 


; 


Again he says: ) 
: ‘Every duty on imported merchandise gives to the domestic manufacturer 
an advantage equal to the duty.”’ 

_ [Applause.] 


How will gentlemen reconcile this statement with the contention > : 
on that side that the consumer does not pay the increased price? = = 


; ois Every duty on imported merchandise gives to the domestic manufacturer e 
an advantage equal to the duty, and to that extent every tariff isa protective oe 
tariff. ‘ : ce 

[Applause. ] | fe 


is Again he said on the particular point I am discussing: 


_ “Tf you converse with intelligent men engaged in the business of manufac- 
turing they will tell you that. they are willing to compete with England, France_ 
Germany, and all the countries of Europe at the old rates of duty. If you 
reduce their products toa specie basis, and put them upon the same footing they 
: ‘were on before the war, the present rates of duty would be too high. It would 
‘not be necessary for scarce any branch of indusiry to be protected to the extent — 
of your present tariff law. They do not ask protection against the pauper labor — 
of Kurope, but they ask protection against the creation of your own laws.” 


a Ra Piavee. ] 


= 


He referred to the internal-revenue laws and the paper currency. 

| the internal-revenue laws of which the manufacturers then com- 

lained have been long since abolished. The business of the oe aS 
is ad and has been for many years, conducted upon a specie Sree a 


> 


‘of fio revenue. [Applause. ] 
es delivered in the Senate in 1872 upon this same eee 


_sonn G. CARLISLE. 


A Memprr. I would ahs to hear it. 2 1 ae 
Mr. CARLISLE. Itis good reading. . Pera 
A Memper. It will help him at Chicago. oe 
Mr. CARLISLE. If he will stand by the doctrines and nOHeE| he e 
announced then it ought to help him to secure the Republican nomi- — 
nation at Chicago. He said, in a speech delivered on the 15th of 
March, 1872: : es 


“Tt must be remembered that the present duties, taken together, are far in — . 
excess of what they were before the war, and that they have been three times ~ 
largely increased since the passsage of the Morrill tariff act of 1861. Cae 

‘“‘The result of such duties is to secure to mechanical industries higher 
wages than can be earned in other kindred employments. Such excessive pro- 
tection not only ceases to diversify production, but forces labor into protected 
employments. If the present rates of duty were high enough during and since 
the war, when home industry was burdened with heavy internal taxes—with 
stamp duties, income taxes, and high rates on raw materials—then surely they _ 
are now too high when all these taxes are removed. * * * Ihave listened 
with patience, day by day, to the statements of gentlemen who are interested in — 5 
our domestic productions. I am a firm believer in the general idea of protect- 
ing their industries, but I assure them, as I assure their representatives here, — i 
that if the present high rates of duty, unexampled in our country, and higherby 
“nearly 50 per cent, than they were in 1861, are maintained on metallic and 
textile fabrics after we have repealed the very internal taxes which gave rise to 
them, and after we have substantially given them their raw materials free of 
duties, we shall have a feeling of dissatisfaction among other interests in the 
country that will overthrow the whole system, and do greater harm ee 4 
possibly be done by a moderate reduction of the present rates of duty. And I 


am quite sure that intelligent men engaged in the production of various forms — ‘ 


of textile and metallic fabrics feel as I do, that it is wiser and better to do what 

is just and right, to make a reduction on their products, at least to the extent 

of the reduction in this bill on their raw materials, Sn than to invite a con- # 
_troversy in which I believe they will be in the wrong.” Me 


[Applause. ] 


And he also said this, to which I desire to call the Pe 
attention of my friends on the other side of the House, those who | 
disagree with me upon the principles which ought to govern 
taxation in this country: A 


“<The public mind is not yet prepared to apply the key to a genuine revenue - Ce a 
reform. A few years of further experience will convince the whole body On 
our people that a system of national taxes, which rests the whole burden of 
_ taxation on consumption, and not one cent on property or income, is intrinsi- 
pe vally unjust. While the expenses of the National Government are ei oS “ 


ad deer by the protection of property, it is but fhe to require property. 1 con- 
‘tribute to their payment. It will not do to say that each person consumes in 
proportion to his means. This is not true. Every one must see that the con- 
sumption of the rich does not bear the same relation to the consumption of the 
poor as the income of the one does to the wages of the other. As wealth 
accumulates this injustice in the fundamental basis of our system will be felt 
ee and forced upon the attention of Congress. ”. 

[Great applause. | 


I do not know any place where this principle has been more clearly — 
_ stated than it is here stated by the Senator from Ohio, But I must 
pass on to other matters. 
It seems that our friends on the other side have at last condiidad 
_ that there ought to be a reduction of the revenue, and many gentle- 
men who have spoken in opposition to the pending bill have foreshad- — 
- owed their policy. Its main feature, in fact about its only featureas — 
- regards the tariff, is the total repeal of the duty on sugar and the 
- payment of a bounty to the producers of that article; not to the — 
_ jaborer who tills the soil and converts the cane juice into sugar, but — 
to the capitalist who owns the plantation and the refinery. After 
all their professions of love for the laboring man, after all their — 
- arguments to show that labor receives the benefit of the tariff, after _ 
all their harrowing descriptions of the deplorable condition to vehiGh 
os our laboring classes would be reduced if the tariff were removed, 
- when they come to put their propositions in the form of practical 
legislation the mask falls off and the natural features of the system 
are exposed. 
But, sir, let us see what would be the effect of the repeal of the 
duty on sugar—the effect upon the revenue and upon the people who © 
are compelled to pay taxes in some form for the support of the Gov- 


- The latest reports I have at hand showing the total amount of 
sugar produced in this country and the total amount consumed are 
or the year 1886, and they show that the domestic production was 
eee pounds, while the total consumption was 3 111.640,000 
sounds. It thus appears that considerably less than one-tenth of the — 


is imported and pays duty at the custom- heuse: The duty collected 
uring the last fiscal year was $57,000,000. Now, assuming that. the a 


-._ of the duty is added to the price of the domestic product, it is easy 


, _ charged against the present system of tariff LARA It is a cones 


Ab ioducers of the domestic aria of the same chayanee as the im- 


we Louisiana as I would be if it were to be paid to the cotton- Lee» 
of Georgia or the wheat-growers of Minnesota. It is a vicious an 


Da Sue If ‘cepa desire to extend relief to the proms 


“The heen of this duty therefore, awhile e onl undtoubiodlem - 
duce the revenue, would afford very little relief to the people it 


comparison with the relief that would be afforded by the repeal o: 
duties upon many other articles in common use. For instance, t | 


“the anes onal nes par the consumers of these ar iclees Be 
According to the last report of the American Iron and Steel Associa- 
tion, which has just been issued, there were produced in this country — 

during the year 1887, 2,354,130 gross tons of Bessemer-steel rails, ~ & 
The duty upon this riicle is $17 per ton. Applying the same tule se 
to this article which i have applied to sugar, and which gentlemen — \ 
on the other side also apply to sugar, that is, that the whole amount 


_ to see that the increased cost of steel rails alone to the people of this 
country in 1887 was over $40,000,000, although the Government: a 
ceived only about $1,000,000 revenue from this source. 

The proposition to pay a bounty of 2 cents per pound out of thes ; 
Treasury to the sugar-grower is a confession of all that has been 


era 


_ ported article, and it is a confession that the amount of the duty on 
- the foreign Eee is added to va price of the domestic one; for bs 


tion for the purpose of paying a bounty es the sugar- growers < 


demoralizing policy, and can never become permanent in th 


compelled to wear. This would be a general and not a partial meas 
ure of relief, and would be creditable to a great political party which 
seeks to govern the whole country. The people who are interest d 
_in the production of sugar can neither be bribed nor deceived by : 


“ - offer ofa pee for" they know that their es citizens engaged - 

in other pursuits will not consent to be taxed for any sR length 
_ of time for any such purpose. . 
-_- Mr. Chairman, it has been stubbornly contended all through the ce 
_ debate that high rates of duty upon imported goods are beneficial tO. 


- the g sreat body of consumers, because such duties, instead of increas- — 


- port.of the existing system are not only superfluous, but manifestly 
unsound. The proposition that a high tariff enables the producer to 

- pay higher wages for his labor, and the proposition that it also re- 
_ duces the prices of the articles he has to sell, which are the products 

of that labor, are utterly inconsistent with each other, and no inge- 
- nuity of the casuist can possibly reconcile them. [Great applause.] | 
_ Labor is paid out of its own product, and unless that product can be 


ing the price of the domestic articles of the same kind, actually re-_ . 
_ duce the prices. If this be true all the other arguments in sup-  - 


sold for a price which will enable the employer to realize areasonable __ 


_ profit and pay the established rates of wages, the business must cease 
or the rates of wages must be reduced. When the price of the 
finished product is reduced by reason of the increased efficiency 
_ of labor, or by reason of the reduced cost of the raw material, the 
employer | may continue to pay the same or even a higher rate of 
wages and still make his usual profits. But the tariff neither in- 
_ creases the efficiency of labor nor reduces the cost of the raw material. 
I do not deny that prices have greatly fallen during the last fifty — 


os 


- free-trade countries as well as in protectionist countries. Nor dol 
deny that during thé same time the general tendency has been > 
ve - towards an increase in the rates of wages; and this is true also of all 
_ eivilized countries, free-trade and protection alike. It is not possi- 
é for me now to enumerate, much less discuss, all the causes that 
ave contributed to these results. One of the most efficient causes, 
in fact the most efficient cause, is the combination of skilled labor 
with machinery in the production of commodities. The introduction 
nd use of improved machinery has wrought a complete revolution. 
in nearly all our manufacturing industries, and in many cases has 
| enabled one man to do the work which it required one hundred men 
to do before. Here isa statement furnished by the United States 
Jommissioner of Labor to the chairman of the Committee on Ways 
Ec Means, showing the value of the product of a week’s labor in | 


ple 


‘one man working sixty hours by hand could turn out 3 iota = 
cotton yarn, worth $2.25, or 7 cents per pound; now the same ~ 


years, not only in this country, but all over the civilized world—in © - 


man, if ip were living, Seu finn out in alate i House with the use 
_ machinery 3,000 pounds of cotton yarn of the same character worth 
$450 fapplause}, or 15 cents per pound. The cotton-spinner now re 
ceives as wages for his week’s work more than three times as much ~ 
as the total value of the product of a week’s work, including the 2 
value of the material, in 1818; and yet labor is far ‘chennes to the — 
employer now than ii was: thend oA though the employer now Te 
ceives only one-fifth as much per pound for his cotton yarn as he did ~ 
in 1813. he realizes from the sale of the products of a week’s labor - 
just two hundred times as much as he did then. 
. TI have also a statement prepared by the same official, showing shoe 
be relative production and value of product of a weaver using hand and — 
power machinery, from which it appears that a weaver by hand — 
turned out in seventy-two hours in 1813 45 yards of cotton goods : 
(shirtings), worth $17.91, while a weaver now, using machi 
turns out in sixty hours 1,440 yards, worth $108, Substantially the — 
same exhibit could be made i in regard to a very large number of our — 
manufacturing industries. ds. 6 
_ Ig it strange, Mr. Chairman, in view of these facts, that the prices — 
of manufactured goods have fallen or that the wages of the ae ce 
who produce them have risen? Is it not, on the contrary, remark- 
able that there has not been a greater fall. in prices and a greater | 
increase in wages? Undoubtedly there would have been a greater — y 
reduction in prices and a greater increase in wages if there had ieee 
__ a wider market for the products and a lower cost for the material. 
+The tremendous productive forces at work all over the world in. S 
these modern times, and the small cost of manual labor in comer 
| gon with the value of the products of these combined forces, can- o 
-_- not be realized from any general statement upon the subject: hie 
order to form some idea of the magnitude of these natural and me 
: - chanical forces, and the efficiency of manual labor and skill when — : 
- eonnected with them, let us look at the situation in six of our own % 
manufacturing industries. In the manufacture of cotton goods, 13 
woolen goods, iron and steel, sawed lumber, paper, and in oe 
-flouring and grist mills, there were employed, according to the 
latest statistics, 517,299 persons, not all men, but many of them ™ 
women and children, This labor was supplemented by steam and ie 
water power equal to 2,496,299 horse-power. This is equal to the | 
power of 14,977,794 men; and thus we find that a little over 517, 000 
persons of all ages and sexes are performing, in connection with fe 
steam and water power, the work of 15,495,093 vege oa Lea 
men. aaa 
The railroad, the steam-vessel, the telegraph, the “improves he 


+ 
A 


. 


ner yom q. “CARLISLE 


facilities for the Sondueiiae Hadgesl transactions, and many other 
conveniences introduced into our modern systems of production and 
distribution and exchange have all contributed their share towards | 
the reduction of prices, and it would be interesting to inquire what 
their influence has been; but I cannot pursue this particular pines 
further without occupying too much time. 


Gentlemen are in the habit of referring to the great decline in ee bg ‘ 


price of steel rails in this country as conclusive evidence of the fact 
that the tariff reduces the cost of manufactured products to the con- 
‘sumer. Why, sir, they could not, in my opinion, have selected a_ 
more unfortunate illustration: In the first place, the prices of steel 
rails have fallen all over the world and especially in England, where ~ 
they are and always have been admitted free of duty. The price 
there is now and has at all times been very much lower than here. 
In the second place, the price was falling rapidly both here and in | 
England before the imposition of the duty of $28 per ton by act of 
Congress in 1870. During the five years next preceding the imposi- 
tion of that duty the price in England had fallen steadily, year by 
-year, and had declined from $85.65 per ton to $50.37 per ton; and in 
the United States the same process had been going on, and the price 
had fallen from $148.50 per ton in gold in 1864 to $91.17 in 1870, 
‘Then the increased duty was imposed, and what was the result? The 
: PRIS immediately began to rise, both here and in England, so that. 
in 1873 the average price in England was $80.05 per ton and the 
p average price here was $103.91 per ton in gold. Then came, in the 
fall of that year, the great industrial and financial depression which 
_arrested the growth and development of the country, suspended the 
construction of works of internal improvement, paralyzed our in-— 
-dustries, and brought down the prices of nearly everything that the 
people produced. Steel rails, of course, like all other manufactured - 
products, felt the influence of this depression, and the price declined 
and has never since been as high as it was before, 
en But, Mr. Chairman, we are told that a tariff is beneficial to the 
farmer because, first, it protects him against competition from the 
agricultural products of other countries, and, secondly, because, by 
diversifying our industries and increasing the number of persons 
engaged in other than agricultural pursuits, it furnishes him with 
a profitable home market for his products It cannot be necessary 
for me to make an argument to show that no rate of duty, how- 
er high, upon articles which the farmer is compelled to send 
road and sell at foreign prices, can possibly benefit him here 


home or elsewhere, This has been so often shown, and isso 


s "thoroughly. Gndeeinod: by the. ficpere themselves, 
ss Stes a waste of time to ‘dwell ane the euniorey 


So, hay, and a few other articles prevents competitions frot 
_ the other side of the line; but if the gentleman from Maine is correc : 
in his contention that the tariff does not increase the price of t 
domestic product, of course this is of no advantage whatever tot : 
American farmer. In fact, according to the gentleman’ s argume ty 


: But I do not agree with the gentleman, and I concede that 
producer of these articles at the places indicated may occasiona 
receive higher prices for them than he would receive if there w 


high rates of duty upon articles which they do not produce 

are compelled to buy and use. When the advantages are se 

against the disadvantages, the benefits against the burdens, he 
: lance will be very largely on the wrong side. [Applause. ] oe 

: Of course our home market has been constantly 1 improving, - 


or Bless rk with the increase of population and wealth, 
extension of the use of machinery, which reduces the co 
production, and the multiplication of facilities for communic 


. es long, Mr. Chairman, are our farmers to be compelled te 
a _ tribute to other industries and wait for the creation ore a ‘ho 


production. Taking the average crop of wheat in this co 
for several years past, and assuming that there shall be n 
_ erease whatever in production, and that the domestic consum 
per capita shall remain just at what it now is, there wou 
be no sufficient home market for this great agricultural 
until our population had reached nearly one hundred 
The official statistics of the domestic production, exportati 
home consumption of raw cotton show that it would | a: 


7 our Boden to be manufactured i in foteien countries, Ne one- ir 
only i is manufactured at home by all the machinery and labor now 
employed. In 1880 there were $219,505,000 invested in cotton manu- e 
- factures, and there were employed in that industry 172,554 hands, — 
To work up our present production of raw cotton would require an : 
“investment i in this manufacture of $660,000,000 and the employment _ 
of 517,662 hands. If we have been more than one hundred years, — 
part of the time under very high tariffs, in. so developing our cotton 
manufactures as to enable them to take one-third of our product at =~ 
a European prices, how many more centuries will be required to enable 
them to consume the whole product at prices fixed by competition 
here athome? [Great applause.] “When gentlemen have solved this 
problem to the satisfaction of the American cotton-grower, hemay 
be able to listen with patience to the arguments by which they at- _ 
tempt to convince him of the immense advantages of a home mar- 
ket that will never exist. What is to be done with these great 
_agricultural products, and with many others which are now exported, 
thie the farmers are waiting for the home market which the advo- 
cates of restrictive legislation have been promising them for so many — 
years ? Are the farmers and planters of the North and South to | 
abandon their wheat and cotton lands or cultivate crops not suited 
to their soil or climate while gentlemen are making experiments to 
scertain whether or not a home market may not be created by 
gislation? No, sir. No matter what gentlemen may predict or 
what they may promise, these great industries must goon, and the | 
American farmer must sell his products in any market he can reaae Ame 
and at any price he can get. [Applause.] 

Sak The gentleman from Maine [Mr. DINGLEY], while appearing to ad- 
it that the prices of our exportable agricultural products are fixed 
the foreign markets in which they are sold, endeavors to avoid 
he force of the admission by contending that the prices in the for- _ 
sign market are regulated by the amount of production here. Now, ~ 
Mr. Chairman, undoubtedly the amount of production here has ee 
e influence upon the prices abroad, but the controlling elements 
the world’s supply and the world’s demands. Our farmers do 
Brapok among themselves alone in the provision markets of _ 
rope. Our wheat-growers, for instance, compete with the wheat- 
ers of Pueind, France, er ueHy: Russia, eae India, and x 


pos Set 


JOHN @. CARLISLE. — 
-meets in the open and free markets of the world the products, 
of the poorest- -paid labor on the face of the earth. | 

The lately emancipated serfs of Russia; the oppressed peasantry 


of Hungary; the ryot of India, who lives on millet and rice, wears no 


garment except a coarse cotton shirt, and sleeps on the floor of a 
bamboo hut—all pour the products of their labor into the free markets ~ 
of Europe to be sold in competition with the grain from our Western — 
States and Territories. Sir, our agricultural constituents are not ig- — 
norant of the true situation. They know very well that as to all the - 
articles which we are capable of exporting and are actually exporting - 
—and this includes all the principal productions of their industry— ° 
the foreign market is just as valuable to them as the home market, 
for the obvious reason that the prices are fixed abroad, and they re- 
ceive here only what they could receive there, after deducting the - 
cost of transportation. [Applause. ] 

What the American farmer most needs is a home market in which 
he can purchase his supplies as cheaply as his competitors purchase — 
theirs [applause]; and if he cannot secure this, then he simply asks 


n> the poor privilege of making his purchase where he is compelled to. 


ae pretense of protecting ourselves in our own. Let us diminish the 


make his sales, and to be permitted to bring his goods home without _ 
being compelled to pay unreasonable taxes and fines by his Govern- 
ment for carrying ona harmless and legitimate business. [Applause. i: 
Mr. Chairman, we want not only the home market, but all the 
markets of the world for the varied products of this great COU a ‘2 
_ [Applause.] We want to send our agricultural products, our cotton, 
and our breadstuffs and our provisions, to the naked and hungry 
manufacturing peoples of Europe, and our manufactured products to 
the agricultural peoples of South America, Mexico, and Asia. We 
can do this when we determine to trade with other people upon fair 
terms, but we cannot do it so long as we protect England and other 
- manufacturing countries in the great markets of the world upon the é 


cost of production in our agricultural and manufacturing industries, 
not by diminishing the wages of labor, but by reducing taxation — | 
upon the necessaries of life and upon the materials which constitute — 
‘the basis of our finished products, and by removing, as far as we 
can, the restrictions which embarrass our people in their efforts to. 
exchange the fruits of their own toil which they do not need for the | 
commodities of other countries whic. they doneed. [Great applause, — 
loud and prolonged. ] ean 


en 


LATIVE PRODUCTION, VALUE OF . PRobuor. AND EARNINGS OF 


SPINNER USING 


- INDUSTRY. 


1813 
1880 


- INDUSTRY. 


1813 
1880 


__ InpustRY. 


Number of estab- 


A, 


lishments. 


HAND AND POWER MACHINERY. 


Product of one 
spinner per 
week. 


spinner per 


Descrip- week, 


tion. of 
unit. 


Amount.| Value. | Highest. 


‘ $2. 
No. 10 8,000 450.00 $9.30 


Production of one 
weaver per 
week. 


weaver per 


Descrip- silat 


tion of 
unit. 


Amount.| Value. | Highest. 


ards. 
45 $17.91 


108.00 


{ 


six 


men to a horse- 
equal to 


-power be- 
low. 


steam and water 
power equal to 


horse 
power, 
men be 


low. 
Actual employés | 


Number of em- 
Supplemented by 
Reckoning 


135,519 
58,448 
TUBB 

149,997 
17,910 
_ 77,870 


Si, 299 


1,658,024 
4,627,206 
2/383, 482 
4.931.568 

743,472 
639,042 
14,977,794 


351 2,496,296 


Earnings of one. 


Lowest. 


Earnings of one. 


Lowest. 


and horse-power 
reduced to em- 


Tr 


Hours of labo 


ot) ues 5008 sa 


Kg 
i 


Saas 
pi tu iM 


Pie 
, a hus 
en 

Wn ae 


; V 
iB DS in 
2a ae 


i i 4 


Valin 


3 0112 054471211 


